




















































































































































































































































































































V*0* 

■AO, 


w? A ‘'HP* v°^, *111P\° -MS' n £% Y 

-”’*/' • ofv- .. V ONO ’» * •?<£'" *^°^X* 0 “°^^ 0 '*S 

AvmV,«^V sto\ 





_ »n * „ 
* CY ^ 

° 



* «L_ V LV *A 

° <?♦t*«.\ t,, ’‘ 

A 4 W 0 \ J& * 
<r :p|“ Jj't? ° 

vSK*. ** v \ ° 

x). * 


f ^ »• w y '^> * -*yross^> - TT •*’ ^ -4 

P/jfttok*. +* & *WA. ^ 


*HB&* <&%. v Vj "^P 

« »‘^ . u, V'». > ’ l< ( ji^»*'<, , V < 5 

%v- J 


. > ^ * < 
^ ^ a. v . 0 , * Qf> .rb- 

* Jit * - |H| ° W 

?\ lip/ /\®a 
A'^K ’ V^&V * * >v “** 

•>ov* • 111^: W 


° ^ 

V* 

. , ■ % »s S3 , - v yv - -^m» , Sp’V. » w 

V^s^y . t VW, . . ,V” 

* V :M? V ?**»♦ %■/? 


'em * 


V<b 

*o*j^ ^P N ^^* s ^ ♦ Li fl Vj, 

t 0 0 -t^y °0 ^ ’- ' 

7 a - '“' <1 ^sNNVv^k ./• -V^ 

v-o* 0 4P11I * ov 

«>q* * v°^> <p*fc 

’^*o, 4jj, fI ' 1 ^ 

\ V^ YHT* W *Y ^ 0 * 



. -V 

*» /A *■ 

2 z 

- 0 


V* .C P ^ 

• K 9 11 * rC^ s * * > V-y 

■- K C\ Yyfw *- / 

* 0 * *~ fW 


_____ i ^ » 

Cy 5 ^ J 0 ^v y,< bj- o 

,TTs^<v^ l, G * * s >*> L .' v 5 V oVk ^°" o - G *<\* 

s< * &(tffcC-f T ' 


’ ff n * 


f/> , - « 

» V : 

* °<v * 

* «5> % % * eHs»° Y"V 




^ov^ 










rn * 


*■ ^ t * * > *fe»v ^no’ ^ ** 0 C H'**»'i* '^ > * * ,. V * 
a 9 V. A ft** (^ aO \ V. 

* *'-^ # * «s 


* ^JV 

•*> sfy ’^k a 

• * & 4&V 



o% ,. 

° 'b# “ 

aV4 Z o 

» o_V VI. ^ -^Jfur * ^ V' °.-ViX'^>l- -J 

■ gPcOiot^+o* ’ ♦ *V\« XI *A '” ■ '■* '° 

w^° ° - A ■** 



O 4^. y ~>>>^yy )[^ ^ ^ ^ 

>\,. o\‘*-n .**°°, .. V >3> 


' AS 


<^ % ° * »V ^ 

\\ <fs 
: V : 

° <K°* 


;^v.. Vo’^,. „,v* 

,V \ 

.c».n J ^ 


u 

’j*. * llfeS* ° * .<£' 

*v \^m$r *? <y ^ ow^rajj'^ _v 

‘•"«*X* * * ‘ 

* ^OV * JipISf „. ° 

i). rs^ « 99 Sj«^m u /»> * 


*°A 



* 

0 .-“'VCJv _ 

15 3 ? o 0 

1 C$* s « - r " " Av 9 ** * o A 4u 8 l ' 

_ ■£> A> J +\df@to!:+ ,?■. «, v * * vx>. 

<1 V** cA * iEJKTO * ^ -N\ wTVl. P 

° *^rfr O r 




o <AO. 

io^V V 

^ •Xjfo W i 

\ V«HR* ^ V \ </\ %1P** % ^r * • 

=,;V * * ‘".V°’ i */c-.,V * ” S V S \- u *«fv° ’ l * * * , ^> s , 

^ w .°SK* w *mm? ° *+<? 

, %° Y ^, “ <^°<<' *A§m§ * ^ v0<( ' r S^fM •» ^'’'A. 

‘ :AV.*®* \a^ = /Jfe; \ 

*.. 8a . 4 :*,wK;^ v \ \wP/ ; ,W/** v \ Wm* ^ 

A/° • ^ O^OHO,/^ 4 “ 4 ‘".V” * x “ 0 -*° °' ^ “*' A • • - < 

YV '’^'' J - A ' 






»'; V «b^ •&&£• ^ f'4 

. o fV* r %/* ° “ °° . o , \* 

’ f® ? W »W: fi® = "< 




»° ^ 0 Vtl 

°0, *■• 


MftiF 


** x 

^ %\' v <?V‘*' A •’V v^^ensr 

tf. «° °v ^ ^ 


J=% 

<y *y 


o. K 

*0 V * 

A ,•"/ „->V*°',V ■ ■ 

\/ * Jfe ; \:#;\ 

^ v \ V^pV /VM* ^ 


. n N 


VT 1 

S>- 


T * 







Draft Environmental Impact Statement/ 
Environmental Impact Report and 
Draft Land Use Plan Amendment 

Volume I 


North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 



Federal Energy Regulatory Commission California State Lands Commission 

Washington, DC Sacramento, CA 

Cooperating Agencies: 

Bureau of Land Management 
Bureau of Reclamation 


FERC/EIS-0200D CSLC EIR No. 739 

Docket Nos. CP06-61 -000 State Clearinghouse No. 2006081127 

CP01-23-000 BLM Reference No. CACA-42662 




September 2006 






































































. • 








































Draft Environmental Impact Statement/ 
Environmental Impact Report and 
Draft Land Use Plan Amendment 

Volume I 

North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 



Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 
Washington, DC 


California State Lands Commission 
Sacramento, CA 


Cooperating Agencies: 
Bureau of Land Management 
Bureau of Reclamation 


FERC/EIS-0200D 
Docket Nos. CP06-61-000 
CPO1-23-000 


CSLC EIRNo. 739 
State Clearinghouse No. 2006081127 
BLM Reference No. CACA-42662 




September 2006 













2006 


475760 







In Reply Refer To: 

OEP/DG2E/Gas 1 
North Baja Pipeline, LLC 
FERC Docket Nos. CP06-61-000 

CPO1-23-000 

CA State Clearinghouse No. 2006081127 
BLM Reference No. CACA-42662 


TO THE PARTY ADDRESSED: 

The environmental staffs of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or Commission), the 
California State Lands Commission (CSLC), and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) (Agency Staffs) 
have prepared this draft environmental impact statement/environmental impact report and draft land use plan 
amendment (draft EIS/EIR/plan amendment) to address North Baja Pipeline, LLC’s (North Baja) proposed 
expansion of its natural gas pipeline system. 

This draft EIS/EIR/plan amendment was prepared as required by the National Environmental Policy 
Act (NEPA), the California Environmental Quality Act, and the Federal Land Management and Policy Act. 
The purpose of this document is to inform the public and the permitting agencies about the potential adverse 
and beneficial environmental impacts of the proposed North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project (Project or 
proposed Project) and its alternatives, and recommend mitigation measures that would reduce the significant 
adverse impacts to the maximum extent possible, and, where feasible, to a less than significant level. The 
Agency Staffs have concluded that if the Project is constructed and operated in accordance with applicable 
laws and regulations, North Baja’s proposed mitigation, and the Agency Staffs’ additional mitigation 
recommendations, it would be an environmentally acceptable action. 

The FERC is the lead Federal agency and will use the document to consider the environmental impacts 
that could result if it issues North Baja a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity and a Presidential 
Permit amendment under sections 7 and 3, respectively, of the Natural Gas Act. The CSLC is the lead State 
agency and will use the document to consider North Baja’s application to amend its existing right-of-way lease 
across the State’s Sovereign and School Lands in conjunction with the environmental impacts that could result 
from any part of the Project in California. 

The BLM is participating as a cooperating agency in the preparation of this document because the 
Project would cross Federal land under the jurisdiction of the Palm Springs-South Coast, El Centro, and Yuma 
Field Offices. The Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) is also a cooperating agency in the preparation of this 
document because lands administered by the BOR would be crossed by the Project. Under section 185(f) of 
the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920, the BLM has the authority to issue Right-of-Way Grants for all affected 
Federal lands. This draft EIS/EIR/plan amendment will be used by the BLM to consider whether to amend 
North Baja’s existing Right-of-Way Grant and issue Temporary Use Permits for the installation of 
approximately 67.4 miles of pipeline and ancillary facilities across Federal lands managed by the BLM, the 
BOR, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). This draft EIS/EIR/plan amendment will also be used by 
the BLM to consider amending the California Desert Conservation Area Plan (as amended), which would be 
necessary for pipeline construction outside of designated utility corridors, as well as amending the Yuma 



District Resource Management Plan, which would be necessary for pipeline construction across the Milpitas 
Wash Special Management Area. 

The BLM proposes to adopt this draft EIS/EIR/plan amendment per Title 40 Code of Federal 
Regulations (CFR) Part 1506.3 to meet its responsibilities under NEPA and its planning regulations per Title 
43 CFR Part 1610. The BLM will present separate Records of Decision for the Right-of-Way Grant and the 
plan amendments for the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project after the issuance of the final environmental 
impact statement/environmental impact report and proposed land use plan amendment (final EIS/EIR/proposed 
plan amendment). The concurrence or non-concurrence of the BOR and the FWS would be considered in the 
BLM’s decision. 

The existing North Baja system is currently certificated by the FERC to transport 512,500 dekatherms 
per day (Dthd) of natural gas in a southbound direction. Once completed, the expanded system would be 
capable of transporting up to 2,932,000 Dthd (2,753 million standard cubic feet per day) of natural gas from 
planned liquefied natural gas (LNG) storage and vaporization terminals located on the Baja California coast in 
Mexico in a northbound direction for delivery to customers in California and Arizona. In addition to the new 
volumes from the LNG terminals, North Baja would continue to offer southbound gas transportation service 
for several existing shippers. 

This draft EIS/EIR/plan amendment addresses the potential environmental effects of the construction 
and operation of the following facilities proposed by North Baja: 

• 79.8 miles of pipeline loop 1 (B-Line) adjacent to North Baja’s existing pipeline (A-Line) 
consisting of 11.7 miles of 42-inch-diameter pipeline extending from the existing Ehrenberg 
Compressor Station at milepost (MP) 0.0 in La Paz County, Arizona to the existing Rannells 
Trap at MP 11.7 in Riverside County, California, and 68.1 miles of 48-inch-diameter pipeline 
extending from Rannells Trap to an interconnection at the U.S.-Mexico border at MP 79.8 in 
Imperial County, California; 

• less than 0.1 mile (about 20 feet) of 36-inch-diameter pipeline (SoCal Gas Company [SoCal 
Gas] Interconnect) to connect the B-Line to the existing SoCal Gas system within the 
proposed Blythe Meter Station site at MP 0.5 in Riverside County; 

• 0.6 mile of 10-inch-diameter pipeline lateral 2 (Blythe Energy Interconnect Lateral [BEI 
Lateral]) extending from the proposed Blythe Meter Station site to an interconnection with the 
existing Blythe Energy Facility I supply pipeline in Riverside County; 

• 45.7 miles of 16-inch-diameter pipeline lateral (Imperial Irrigation District [IID] Lateral) 
extending from MP 74.5 of the B-Line near the existing Ogilby Meter Station to the existing 
IID El Centro Generating Station in Imperial County; 

• modifications at its existing Ehrenberg Compressor Station and the existing Ogilby Meter 
Station to allow northbound flow of natural gas; 


A loop is a segment of pipeline that is usually installed adjacent to an existing pipeline and connected to it at both ends. The loop allows more 
gas to be moved through the system. 

A lateral pipeline typically takes gas from the main system to deliver it to a customer, local distribution system, or another interstate 
transmission system. 


2 



• metering modifications at its existing El Paso Natural Gas Company (El Paso) Meter Station 
at the Ehrenberg Compressor Station site to allow LNG-source gas to be delivered into the El 
Paso system; 

• one meter station (Blythe Meter Station) in Riverside County to measure gas delivery from the 
North Baja system to SoCal Gas and the BEI Lateral; 

• one odorant facility at the existing Ogilby Meter Station to odorize the natural gas before 
delivery into the SoCal Gas system; 

• one meter station (El Centro Meter Station) at the existing IID El Centro Generating Station to 
measure gas delivery from the North Baja system to the IID; 

• one tap where the IID Lateral would connect to the B-Line in Imperial County; 

• three pig 3 launchers; 

• four pig receivers; 

• nine remote manual valves with automatic shutdown capability on the B-Line, adjacent to the 
existing A-Line valve sites; and 

• four remote manual valves with automatic shutdown capability on the IID Lateral. 
Comment Procedures and Public Meetings 

Any person wishing to comment on the draft EIS/EIR/plan amendment is encouraged to do so. To 
expedite the Agency Staffs’ receipt and consideration of your comments, electronic submission of 
comments is strongly recommended. See Title 18 CFR 385.200l(a)(l)(iii) and the instructions on the FERC 
Internet website ( www.ferc.gov) under the eFiling link and the link to the User's Guide. Before you can submit 
comments, you will need to create a free account by clicking on “Sign-up” under “New User.” You will be 
asked to select the type of submission you are making. This type of submission is considered a “Comment on 
Filing.” Comments submitted electronically must be submitted by December 28, 2006. 

If you wish to mail comments, please mail your comments so that they will be received in Washington, 
DC on or before December 28, 2006. Please carefully follow these instructions to ensure that your 
comments are received and properly recorded: 

• Send an original and two copies of your comments to: 

Magalie R. Salas, Secretary 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 
888 First St. NE; Room 1A 
Washington, DC 20426; 

• Reference Docket Nos. CP06-61 -000 and CP01 -23-000; 

• Label one copy of your comments for the attention of Gas 1, DG2E; and 


A pig is an internal tool that can be used to clean and dry a pipeline and/or to inspect it for damage or corrosion. 


3 





• Send an additional copy of your letter to: 

Tom Filler 

California State Lands Commission 
100 Howe Avenue, Suite 100 South 
Sacramento, CA 95825 

Your letter to the CSLC should reference CA State Clearinghouse No. 2006081127. 

In addition to or in lieu of sending written comments, the FERC, the CSLC, and the BLM invite you to 
attend two public meetings the Agency Staffs will conduct in the Project area to receive comments on the draft 
EIS/EIR/plan amendment. Both meetings will begin at 7:00 PM (PST), and are scheduled as follows: 


Date 

Tuesday, December 5, 2006 


Wednesday, December 6, 2006 


These meetings will be posted 
http://www.ferc.gov/EventCalendar/EventsList.aspx . 

attend and present written or oral comments on the 
meetings will be prepared. 

After the comments are reviewed, any significant new issues are investigated, and necessary 
modifications are made to the draft EIS/EIR/plan amendment, a final EIS/EIR/proposed plan amendment will 
be published and distributed by the Agency Staffs. The final EIS/EIR/proposed plan amendment will contain 
the Agency Staffs’ responses to comments timely received on the draft EIS/EIR/plan amendment. 

Comments will be considered by the FERC, the CSLC, and the BLM, but will not serve to make the 
commenter a formal party to the proceeding. Any person seeking to become a formal party to the proceeding 
must file a motion to intervene pursuant to Rule 214 of the FERC’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (Title 18 
CFR Part 385.214). 

Anyone may intervene in this proceeding based on this draft EIS/EIR/plan amendment. You must file 
your request to intervene as specified above. 4 You do not need intervenor status to have your comments 
considered and responded to. 


Location 

Vacation Inn 
2015 Cottonwood Circle 
El Centro, CA 92243 
(760) 352-9700 

Blythe City Council Chamber 
235 North Broadway 
Blythe, CA 92225 
(760) 922-6161 


on the FERC’s calendar located at 
Interested groups and individuals are encouraged to 
draft EIS/EIR/plan amendment. Transcripts of the 


Interventions may also be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper. See the previous discussion on filing comments electronically. 


4 






The draft EIS/EIR/plan amendment has been placed in the public files of the FERC and the CSLC and 
is available for public inspection at: 


Federal Regulatory Energy Commission California State Lands Commission 

Public Reference Room 100 Howe Avenue, Suite 100 South 

888 First St. NE; Room 2A Sacramento, CA 95825 

Washington, DC 20426 (916)574-1938 

(202) 208-1371 


The draft EIS/EIR/plan amendment is also available for viewing on the FERC and CSLC websites at 
the Internet addresses below. 

www.ferc.govwww.slc.ca.gov 


A limited number of copies of the draft EIS/EIR/plan amendment are available from the FERC’s 
Public Reference Room identified above. These copies may be requested in hard copy or as .pdf files on 
compact disk. In addition, copies of the draft EIS/EIR/plan amendment have been mailed to Federal, State, 
and local government agencies; elected officials; Native American tribes; affected landowners; local libraries 
and newspapers; intervenors to the FERC’s proceeding; and other interested parties. Hard copies of the draft 
EIS/EIR/plan amendment can be viewed at the following libraries in the Project area: 

Yuma County Library District Imperial Public Library 

350 3rd Avenue 200 W. 9th Street 

Yuma, AZ 85364 Imperial, CA 92251 


Palo Verde Valley Library 
125 W. Chanslorway 
Blythe, CA 92225 

El Centro Public Library 
539 State Street 
El Centro, CA 92243 

Hemet Public Library 
510 E. Florida Avenue 
Hemet, CA 92543 

Holtville City Library 
101 E. 6th Street 
Holtville, CA 92250 


City of Rancho Mirage Public Library 
42-520 Bob Hope Drive 
Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 

Glen Avon Library 
9244 Galena Street 
Riverside, CA 92509 

Palo Verde District Library 
701 Silver Spur Road 
Rollins Hills Estates, CA 90274 


Additional information about the Project is available from the FERC’s Office of External Affairs at 1- 
866-208-FERC or on the FERC Internet website (www.ferc.gov) using the eLibrary link. Click on the 
eLibrary link, click on “General Search,” and enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the 
Docket Number field. Be sure you have selected an appropriate date range. For assistance, please contact 
FERC Online Support at FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov or toll free at 1-866-208-3676, or for TTY, contact 
(202) 502-8659. The eLibrary link on the FERC Internet website also provides access to the texts of formal 
documents issued by the FERC, such as orders, notices, and rule makings. 


5 






In addition, the FERC now offers a free service called eSubscription that allows you to keep track of 
all formal issuances and submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time you spend 
researching proceedings by automatically providing you with notification of these filings, document 
summaries, and direct links to the documents. To register for this service, go to the eSubscription link on the 
FERC Internet website. 

Information concerning the involvement of the CSLC in the EIS/EIR process may be obtained from 
Tom Filler, Project Manager, at (916) 574-1938, or on the CSLC Internet website at www.slc.ca.gov . 

Information concerning the proposed land use plan amendments and the involvement of the BLM in 
the EIS/EIR and plan amendment process may be obtained from Lynda Kastoll, Project Manager, at (760) 337- 
4421. 

Magalie R. Salas Paul D. Thayer 

Secretary Executive Officer 

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission California State Lands Commission 


6 



TABLE OF CONTENTS 















































































TABLE OF CONTENTS 


North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 
Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report and 

Draft Land Use Plan Amendment 

VOLUME I Page 

TABLE OF CONTENTS.i 

LIST OF APPENDICES.vii 

LIST OF TABLES.viii 

LIST OF FIGURES.xi 

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS.xii 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.ES-1 

DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND PROJECT OBJECTIVES.ES-1 

PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT AND AREAS OF CONCERN.ES-3 

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES.ES-5 

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED.ES-24 

ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE.ES-26 

MAJOR CONCLUSIONS.ES-26 

1.0 INTRODUCTION. 1-1 

1.1 PROJECT OBJECTIVES, PURPOSE, AND NEED. 1-1 

1.2 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF THIS EIS/EIR. 1-6 

1.2.1 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.1 -7 

1.2.2 California State Lands Commission.1 -8 

1.2.3 Bureau of Land Management and Bureau of Reclamation.1 -9 

1.2.4 Responsible and Trustee Agencies.1 -9 

1.3 PUBLIC REVIEW AND COMMENT. 1-10 

1.4 NONJURISDICTIONAL FACILITIES.1-15 

1.4.1 Background.1-15 

1.4.2 Conclusions.1-18 

1.5 CONSISTENCY WITH REGIONAL AND LOCAL PLANS.1-20 

1.5.1 Bureau of Land Management.1-20 

1.5.2 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.1-22 

1.5.3 Counties and Municipalities.1-23 

1.6 PERMITS, APPROVALS, CONSULTATIONS, AND REGULATORY 

REQUIREMENTS.1-23 

1.7 BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT PROCESS. 1-28 

1.7.1 Regulatory Requirements.1-28 

1.7.2 Need for Plan Amendments.1 -28 

1.7.3 Identification of Issues.1-30 

1.7.4 Planning Criteria.1-30 

1.7.5 Alternatives Considered in the Analysis.1-31 

1.7.6 Agency Coordination.1-31 

1.7.7 Public Participation.1-31 

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION.2-1 

2.1 PROPOSED FACILITIES.2-1 

2.1.1 Pipeline Facilities.2-1 

i 












































TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont’d) 


2.1.2 Aboveground Facilities.2-3 

2.2 LAND REQUIREMENTS.2-4 

2.2.1 Pipeline Facilities.2-7 

2.2.2 Aboveground Facilities.2-9 

2.2.3 Pipe Storage and Contractor Yards.2-10 

2.2.4 Access Roads.2-10 

2.3 CONSTRUCTION PROCEDURES.2-11 

2.3.1 General Pipeline Construction Procedures.2-12 

2.3.2 Special Construction Techniques.2-16 

2.3.3 Aboveground Facility Construction Procedures.2-24 

2.4 CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE.2-24 

2.5 ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE INSPECTION AND MITIGATION 

MONITORING.2-24 

2.6 OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, AND SAFETY CONTROLS.2-28 

2.7 FUTURE PLANS AND ABANDONMENT.2-29 

3.0 ALTERNATIVES.3-1 

3.1 FACTORS USED IN THE SELECTION OF ALTERNATIVES.3-1 

3.1.1 Alternatives Development and Screening Process.3-1 

3.1.2 Alternatives Screening Methodology.3-1 

3.1.3 Summary of Screening Results.3-2 

3.2 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED.3-2 

3.2.1 No Project Alternative.3-2 

3.2.2 System Alternatives.3-5 

3.2.2.1 Other Existing Pipeline Systems.3-6 

3.2.2.2 Pipelines From Other Onshore and Offshore LNG Projects 

Proposed in California.3-7 

3.2.3 Route Alternatives.3-8 

3.2.3.1 B-Line Route Alternatives.3-8 

3.2.3.2 IID Lateral Route Alternatives.3-10 

3.2.4 Route Variations.3-22 

3.2.4.1 East Mesa North Route Variation.3-22 

3.2.4.2 Imperial Valley Route Variations.3-24 

3.2.5 Alternative Delivery Points - Arrowhead Alternative.3-26 

3.2.6 Aboveground Facility Alternatives.3-31 

4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS.4-1 

4.1 GEOLOGY.4-3 

4.1.1 Significance Criteria.4-3 

4.1.2 Geologic Setting.4-3 

4.1.3 Mineral Resources.4-8 

4.1.4 Geologic Hazards.4-9 

4.1.5 Paleontological Resources.4-22 

4.1.6 Arrowhead Alternative.4-27 

4.1.7 No Project Alternative.4-27 

4.2 SOILS.4-28 

4.2.1 Significance Criteria.4-28 

4.2.2 Existing Soil Resources.4-28 

4.2.3 General Impact and Mitigation.4-35 


n 















































TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont’d) 


4.2.4 Site-specific Impact and Mitigation.4-39 

4.2.5 Arrowhead Alternative.4-41 

4.2.6 No Project Alternative.4-42 

4.3 WATER RESOURCES.4-43 

4.3.1 Significance Criteria.4-43 

4.3.2 Groundwater Resources.4-43 

4.3.2.1 Existing Groundwater Resources.4-43 

4.3.2.2 General Impact and Mitigation.4-45 

4.3.2.3 Water Supply Wells.4-47 

4.3.2.4 Groundwater Uses During Construction.4-48 

4.3.3 Surface Water Resources.4-48 

4.3.3.1 Existing Surface Water Resources.4-48 

4.3.3.2 General Impact and Mitigation.4-52 

4.3.3.3 Major and Sensitive Waterbodies.4-56 

4.3.3.4 Surface Water Uses During Construction.4-57 

4.3.3.5 Streambed Alteration Agreement.4-58 

4.3.4 Arrowhead Alternative.4-60 

4.3.5 No Project Alternative.4-61 

4.4 WETLANDS.4-62 

4.4.1 Significance Criteria.4-62 

4.4.2 Existing Wetland Resources.4-62 

4.4.3 General Impact and Mitigation.4-64 

4.4.4 Site-specific Impact and Mitigation.4-67 

4.4.5 Arrowhead Alternative.4-68 

4.4.6 No Project Alternative.4-68 

4.5 VEGETATION.4-69 

4.5.1 Significance Criteria.4-69 

4.5.2 Existing Vegetation Resources.4-69 

4.5.3 General Impact and Mitigation.4-71 

4.5.4 Vegetation Communities of Special Concern or Value.4-80 

4.5.5 Noxious Weeds and Other Invasive Plants.4-80 

4.5.6 Arrowhead Alternative.4-83 

4.5.7 No Project Alternative.4-83 

4.6 WILDLIFE AND AQUATIC RESOURCES.4-84 

4.6.1 Significance Criteria.4-84 

4.6.2 Wildlife.4-84 

4.6.2.1 Existing Wildlife Resources.4-84 

4.6.2.2 General Impact and Mitigation.4-86 

4.6.2.3 Migratory Birds.4-88 

4.6.2.4 Sensitive or Managed Wildlife Habitats and Species.4-90 

4.6.3 Aquatic Resources.4-92 

4.6.3.1 Existing Aquatic Resources.4-92 

4.6.3.2 General Impact and Mitigation.4-93 

4.6.3.3 Site-specific Impact and Mitigation.4-94 

4.6.4 Arrowhead Alternative.4-95 

4.6.5 No Project Alternative.4-95 

4.7 SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES.4-97 

4.7.1 Significance Criteria.4-97 

4.7.2 Regulatory Requirements and Species Identification.4-97 

iii 



















































TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont’d) 


4.7.3 General Impact and Mitigation.4-98 

4.7.4 Federally Listed Threatened and Endangered Species.4-105 

4.7.4.1 Southwestern Willow Flycatcher.4-105 

4.7.4.2 Yuma Clapper Rail.4-107 

4.7.4.3 Desert Tortoise.4-108 

4.7.4.4 Razorback Sucker.4-112 

4.7.4.5 Peirson’s Milk-vetch.4-112 

4.7.5 State-listed Threatened and Endangered Species.4-114 

4.7.5.1 Arizona Bell’s Vireo.4-114 

4.7.5.2 California Black Rail.4-114 

4.7.5.3 Gila Woodpecker.4-115 

4.7.5.4 Western Yellow-billed Cuckoo.4-116 

4.7.5.5 Algodones Dune Sunflower.4-116 

4.7.5.6 Wiggins’s Croton.4-117 

4.7.6 Other Special Status Species.4-117 

4.7.6.1 Colorado River Cotton Rat.4-117 

4.7.6.2 Desert Bighorn Sheep.4-118 

4.7.6.3 Brown-crested Flycatcher.4-118 

4.7.6.4 Burrowing Owl.4-119 

4.7.6.5 Crissal Thrasher.4-120 

4.7.6.6 Ferruginous Hawk.4-121 

4.7.6.7 Le Conte’s Thrasher.4-121 

4.7.6.8 Summer Tanager.4-122 

4.7.6.9 Vermilion Flycatcher.4-122 

4.7.6.10 Yellow-breasted Chat.4-123 

4.7.6.11 Colorado River Toad.4-124 

4.7.6.12 Couch’s Spadefoot Toad.4-124 

4.7.6.13 Flat-tailed Horned Lizard.4-125 

4.7.6.14 Fairyduster.4-127 

4.7.6.15 Giant Spanish-needle.4-127 

4.7.6.16 Sand Food.4-128 

4.7.7 Cumulative, Interdependent, and Interrelated Effects.4-128 

4.7.8 Summary of Determinations of Effect for Federally Listed Species.4-129 

4.7.9 Arrowhead Alternative.4-131 

4.7.10 No Project Alternative.4-132 

4.8 LAND USE, SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREAS, RECREATION AND PUBLIC 

INTEREST AREAS, AND AESTHETIC RESOURCES.4-133 

4.8.1 Significance Criteria.4-133 

4.8.2 Land Use and Ownership.4-134 

4.8.3 Existing Residences and Planned Developments.4-141 

4.8.3.1 Existing Residences.4-141 

4.8.3.2 Planned Developments.4-147 

4.8.4 Special Management Areas.4-148 

4.8.4.1 California Desert Conservation Area.4-148 

4.8.4.2 Milpitas Wash Special Management Area.4-150 

4.8.4.3 Imperial Sand Dunes Recreation Area.4-151 

4.8.5 Recreation and Public Interest Areas.4-152 

4.8.6 Hazardous Waste Sites.4-160 

4.8.7 Aesthetic Resources.4-160 


IV 


















































TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont’d) 


4.8.8 Arrowhead Alternative.4-166 

4.8.9 No Project Alternative.4-168 

4.9 SOCIOECONOMICS.4-169 

4.9.1 Significance Criteria.4-169 

4.9.2 Population, Economy, and Employment.4-169 

4.9.3 Housing.4-171 

4.9.4 Public Services.4-173 

4.9.5 Property Values.4-175 

4.9.6 Tax Revenues.4-176 

4.9.7 Arrowhead Alternative.4-177 

4.9.8 No Project Alternative.4-177 

4.10 TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC.4-178 

4.10.1 Significance Criteria.4-178 

4.10.2 Construction Across and Within Roadways and Railroads.4-178 

4.10.3 Increased Vehicle Traffic.4-184 

4.10.4 Arrowhead Alternative.4-186 

4.10.5 No Project Alternative.4-186 

4.11 CULTURAL RESOURCES.4-187 

4.11.1 Significance Criteria.4-187 

4.11.2 Regulatory Requirements.4-187 

4.11.3 Cultural Resources Assessment.4-188 

4.11.4 Unanticipated Discovery Plan.4-190 

4.11.5 Native American Consultation.4-190 

4.11.6 General Impact and Mitigation.4-193 

4.11.7 Arrowhead Alternative.4-195 

4.11.8 No Project Alternative.4-195 

4.12 AIR QUALITY.4-197 

4.12.1 Significance Criteria.4-197 

4.12.2 Existing Air Quality.4-197 

4.12.3 Regulatory Requirements.4-199 

4.12.4 Air Emission Impacts and Mitigation.4-202 

4.12.5 Health Risk Assessment.4-207 

4.12.6 Arrowhead Alternative.4-207 

4.12.7 No Project Alternative.4-207 

4.13 NOISE.4-209 

4.13.1 Significance Criteria.4-209 

4.13.2 Existing Noise Levels.4-209 

4.13.3 Regulatory Requirements.4-210 

4.13.4 Noise Level Impacts and Mitigation.4-211 

4.13.5 Arrowhead Alternative.4-213 

4.13.6 No Project Alternative.4-213 

4.14 RELIABILITY AND SAFETY.4-214 

4.14.1 Significance Criteria.4-214 

4.14.2 Safety Standards.4-214 

4.14.3 Pipeline Accident Data.4-221 

4.14.4 Impact on Public Safety.4-223 

4.14.5 Terrorism.4-225 

4.14.6 Arrowhead Alternative.4-226 

4.14.7 No Project Alternative.4-226 


v 



















































TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont’d) 


4.15 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS.4-228 

4.15.1 Geology and Soils.4-228 

4.15.2 Waterbodies and Wetlands.4-230 

4.15.3 Vegetation, Wildlife and Habitat, and Aquatic Resources.4-230 

4.15.4 Land Use, Special Management Areas, Recreation and Public 

Interest Areas, and Aesthetic Resources.4-232 

4.15.5 Socioeconomics.4-233 

4.15.6 Transportation and Traffic.4-234 

4.15.7 Cultural Resources.4-234 

4.15.8 Air Quality.4-234 

4.15.9 Noise.4-240 

4.15.10 Reliability and Safety.4-240 

4.15.11 Environmental Justice.4-241 

4.15.12 Conclusion.4-241 

4.15.13 Arrowhead Alternative.4-241 

4.15.14 No Project Alternative.4-241 

4.16 GROWTH-INDUCING IMPACTS.4-242 

4.17 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE.4-245 

4.17.1 Significance Criteria.4-245 

4.17.2 Background and Regulatory Setting.4-245 

4.17.3 Identification of Affected Area for Environmental Justice Analysis.4-246 

4.17.4 Demographic and Economic Data.4-249 

4.17.4.1 Minority Population.4-250 

4.17.4.2 Income Distribution in the Project Area.4-253 

4.17.5 Impact Analysis.4-254 

4.17.6 Arrowhead Alternative.4-255 

4.17.7 No Project Alternative.4-257 

5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.5-1 

5.1 SUMMARY OF THE STAFFS’ ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS.5-1 

5.2 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED.5-2 

5.3 ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE.5-3 

5.4 SIGNIFICANT UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS/STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING 

CONSIDERATIONS.5-4 

5.5 IRREVERSIBLE/IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENT OF RESOURCES; SHORT- 

AND LONG-TERM USES OF THE ENVIRONMENT.5-4 

5.6 FERC AND CSLC STAFFS’ RECOMMENDED MITIGATION.5-5 


vi 



































TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont’d) 


VOLUME II - APPENDICES 


APPENDIX A 

DRAFT EIS/EIR AND DRAFT LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT 
DISTRIBUTION LIST FOR THE NORTH BAJA PIPELINE EXPANSION 
PROJECT 

APPENDIX B 

FACILITY LOCATION MAPS 

APPENDIX C 

TYPICAL RIGHT-OF-WAY CROSS SECTIONS 

APPENDIX D 

TEMPORARY EXTRA WORKSPACES AND ACCESS ROADS 
ASSOCIATED WITH THE NORTH BAJA PIPELINE EXPANSION PROJECT 

APPENDIX E 

CONSTRUCTION MITIGATION AND RESTORATION PLAN 

APPENDIX F 

SPILL PREVENTION, CONTAINMENT, AND CONTROL PLAN FOR 
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS AND WASTES 

APPENDIX G 

HORIZONTAL DIRECTIONAL DRILL PLAN 

APPENDIX H 

TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLANS 

APPENDIX I 

BLASTING SPECIFICATIONS 

APPENDIX J 

GEOLOGIC HAZARDS STUDY 


APPENDIX K PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCE MITIGATION AND MONITORING 


APPENDIX L 

PLAN 

DUST CONTROL PLAN 


APPENDIX M DRY WASHES CROSSED BY THE NORTH BAJA PIPELINE EXPANSION 

PROJECT 

APPENDIX N FIRE PREVENTION AND SUPPRESSION PLAN 


APPENDIX O 

SITE-SPECIFIC RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION MITIGATION PLANS 

APPENDIX P 

OFF-HIGHWAY VEHICLE MANAGEMENT PLAN 

APPENDIX Q 

VISUAL RESOURCE STUDY 

APPENDIX R 

REFERENCES AND CONTACTS 

APPENDIX S 

LIST OF PREPARERS 


vii 



TABLES 


Number Title Page 


1.1-1 North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project Precedent Agreements. 1-6 

1.3-1 Issues/Impacts Identified and Comments Received During the Public Scoping 

Process for the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project. 1-11 

1.6-1 Major Permits, Approvals, and Consultations for the North Baja Pipeline 

Expansion Project.1-24 

2.1.1 -1 Pipeline Facilities Associated with the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project.2-3 

2.1.2- 1 Aboveground Facilities Associated with the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project.... 2-4 

2.2- 1 Summary of Land Requirements Associated with the North Baja Pipeline 

Expansion Project.2-5 

2.2.1- 1 Location of Adjacent Existing Rights-of-Way in Relation to the Proposed Pipeline 

Facilities.2-8 

2.2.3-1 Pipe Storage and Contractor Yards Associated with the North Baja Pipeline 

Expansion Project.2-10 

3.2.1- 1 Comparison of Air Emissions from Burning Fossil Fuels.3-5 

3.2.2- 1 Proposed LNG Import Terminals and Pipelines in California.3-7 

3.2.3- 1 Environmental Comparison of the 22 nd Avenue Alternative with the Proposed 

Route MPs 3.0 to 14.5.3-10 

3.2.3- 2 Environmental Comparison of the Corridor L Alternative with the Proposed 

Route MPs 16.3 to 27.3.3-14 

3.2.3- 3 Environmental Comparison of the Bonds Corner Alternative with the Proposed 

Route MPs 16.3 to 31.5.3-16 

3.2.5-1 Environmental Comparison of the Arrowhead Alternative with the Corresponding 

Segment of the Proposed Project.3-30 

4.1.2- 1 Geologic and Physiographic Conditions Crossed by the North Baja Pipeline 

Expansion Project Facilities.4-6 

4.1.3- 1 Mineral Resources and Mining Areas in the Vicinity of the North Baja Pipeline 

Expansion Project.4-9 

4.1.4- 1 Earthquakes within 62 Miles of the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project with 

Magnitudes Greater Than or Equal to 5.0.4-11 

4.1.4- 2 Active Faults in the Vicinity of the IID Lateral.4-13 

4.1.4- 3 Earthquake Fault Zones in Relation to the Nearest Proposed IID Lateral Valve 

Locations.4-18 

4.1.5- 1 Paleontological Sensitivity of Stratigraphic Units Found Along the North Baja 

Pipeline Expansion Project.4-25 

4.1.5- 2 Paleontological Resources Discovered During Construction of the A-Line.4-25 

4.2.2- 1 Soil Characteristics Associated with the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project.4-32 

4.2.2- 2 Prime Farmland and Farmlands of Statewide and Local Importance Affected by 

the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project.4-34 

4.3.2- 1 Water Wells Within 150 Feet of the Centerline of the Pipeline Facilities 

Associated with the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project.4-47 

4.3.3- 1 Perennial Waterbodies, Canals, and Drains Crossed by the North Baja Pipeline 

Expansion Project.4-50 

4.3.3- 2 Hydrostatic Test Water Requirements for the North Baja Pipeline Expansion 

Project .4-58 

4.4.2- 1 Wetlands Crossed by the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project.4-63 

4.5.2- 1 Vegetation Communities Affected by the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project.4-70 


vm 
































TABLES (corn’d) 


Number Title Page 

4.5.3- 1 Acres of Vegetation Communities Affected by the Pipeline Facilities Associated 

with the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project.4-73 

4.5.3- 2 Locations Along the B-Line Where the Construction Right-of-Way Would be 

Reduced to 80 Feet to Minimize Tree Clearing.4-76 

4.6.2- 1 Wildlife Species by Habitat Type Common in the North Baja Pipeline 

Expansion Project Area.4-85 

4.7.2- 1 Special Status Species Initially Identified as Potentially Occurring in the 

Vicinity of the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project.4-99 

4.7.8- 1 Summary of Assessment of Project Impacts on Listed Species.4-130 

4.8.2- 1 Acres of Land Affected by Construction and Operation of the North Baja Pipeline 

Expansion Project.4-135 

4.8.2- 2 Land Uses Crossed by the Pipeline Facilities Associated with the North Baja 

Pipeline Expansion Project (miles).4-137 

4.8.2- 3 Summary of Land Ownership Crossed by the North Baja Pipeline Expansion 

Project (miles).4-139 

4.8.2- 4 Aboveground Facilities Associated with the North Baja Pipeline Expansion 

Project .4-140 

4.8.3- 1 Residences and Businesses Within 100 Feet of the Construction Work Area 

Associated with the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project.4-143 

4.8.5- 1 Recreation and Public Interest Areas Crossed by or Adjacent to the North 

Baja Pipeline Expansion Project.4-153 

4.8.8- 1 Land Use Affected by Construction and Operation of the Arrowhead Alternative.... 4-167 

4.9.2- 1 Existing Socioeconomic Conditions in the North Baja Pipeline Expansion 

Project Study Area.4-170 

4.9.2- 2 Anticipated Construction Workforce for the North Baja Pipeline Expansion 

Project .4-171 

4.9.3- 1 2000 Housing Characteristics in the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 

Study Area.4-172 

4.9.3- 2 2000 Temporary Housing Characteristics in the North Baja Pipeline Expansion 

Project Study Area.4-172 

4.9.6- 1 Estimated Property Tax Payments for Facilities Associated with the North Baja 

Pipeline Expansion Project.4-176 

4.9.6- 2 Estimated Sales Tax Revenue Generated by the North Baja Pipeline Expansion 

Project .4-176 

4.10.2- 1 Named Roads Crossed by the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project.4-179 

4.10.3- 1 Major Roadways Potentially Affected by the North Baja Pipeline Expansion 

Project .4-184 

4.10.3- 2 Anticipated Construction Traffic Associated with the North Baja Pipeline 

Expansion Project.4-185 

4.11.5-1 North Baja’s Native American Consultations Conducted for the North Baja 

Pipeline Expansion Project.4-191 

4.12.2- 1 Federal and State Air Quality Standards and Existing Air Quality in the 

Project Area.4-198 

4.12.3- 1 Fugitive Emissions (Dust) Rules.4-202 

4.12.4- 1 Estimated Emissions of Criteria Pollutants from Project Construction by Year.4-203 

4.13.3- 1 Stationary Source Land Use Noise Standards for Riverside County.4-210 

4.13.3- 2 Noise Standards for Imperial County.4-211 


IX 




























TABLES (cont’d) 


4.13.4-1 Typical Noise Levels from Construction Equipment and Operations.4-212 

4.14.3- 1 Natural Gas Service Incidents by Cause.4-222 

4.14.3- 2 Outside Forces Incidents by Cause (1970-1984).4-222 

4.14.3- 3 External Corrosion by Level of Control (1970-1984).4-223 

4.14.4- 1 Annual Average Fatalities - Natural Gas Transmission and Gathering Systems.4-223 

4.14.4- 2 Nationwide Accidental Deaths.4-224 

4.14.4- 3 Preliminary Identification of High Consequence Areas (HCAs) Crossed by the 

North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project.4-225 

4.15-1 Existing or Proposed Activities Cumulatively Affecting Resources of Concern 

for the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project.4-229 

4.15.8- 1 Phase I Algodones Compressor Station Impacts.4-236 

4.15.8- 2 LRPC and TDM Plant Estimated Impacts.4-237 

4.15.8- 3 Cumulative Estimated Emissions by Site.4-238 

4.15.8- 4 Resultant Estimated Impacts at Maximum U.S. Receptor Locations.4-238 

4.15.8- 5 Existing and Future Potential Risks.4-240 

4.17.2- 1 Major Laws, Regulatory Requirements, Policies, and Plans for Environmental 

Justice .4-247 

4.17.3- 1 Potential Impact Radius Associated with the North Baja Pipeline Expansion 

Project .4-249 

4.17.3- 2 Unpopulated Census Blocks within the Potential Impact Radius Associated with 

the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project.4-249 

4.17.4- 1 Summary of Racial and Ethnic Demographics within the Potential Impact Radius 

Associated with the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project.4-250 

4.17.4- 2 Populated Census Blocks Containing Hispanic or Latino Populations within the 

Potential Impact Radius Associated with the North Baja Pipeline Expansion 

Project in Imperial County.4-251 

4.17.4- 3 Populated Census Blocks Containing American Indian or Alaska Native 

Populations within the Potential Impact Radius Associated with the North 

Baja Pipeline Expansion Project in La Paz County.4-252 

4.17.4- 4 Populated Census Blocks Containing American Indian, Alaska Native, 

Native Hawaiian, and Other Pacific Islander Populations within the Potential 

Impact Radius Associated with the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 

in Riverside County.4-252 

4.17.4- 5 Summary of Income Distribution within the Potential Impact Radius 

Associated with the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project.4-254 

4.17.6- 1 Summary of Racial and Ethnic Demographics within the Potential Impact Radius 

Associated with the Arrowhead Alternative.4-256 

4.17.6- 2 Populated Census Blocks and American Indian or Alaska Native Populations 

within the Potential Impact Radius Associated with the Arrowhead Alternative.4-256 

5.6- 1 Mitigation Monitoring Program for the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project.5-12 


x 


























FIGURES 


Number Title Page 

ES-1 Locations Requiring a BLM Plan Amendment.ES-15 

1.4-1 North Baja System and Upstream Mexican Facilities.1-16 

1.7.2-1 Locations Requiring a BLM Plan Amendment.1-29 

2.1- 1 Project Overview Map.2-2 

2.3.1- 1 Typical Pipeline Construction Sequence.2-13 

2.3.2- 1 Conceptual HDD Waterbody Crossing.2-19 

2.3.2- 2 Typical Canal/Drain Crossings for 18 th Avenue.2-20 

2.3.2- 3 Typical Open-Cut Drain Crossing.2-21 

3.2.3- 1 22 nd Avenue Route Alternative.3-9 

3.2.3- 2 IID Lateral U.S. Route Alternatives Overview.3-11 

3.2.3- 3 Corridor L and Bonds Comer Route Alternatives.3-13 

3.2.3- 4 ISDRA Siting Factors.3-18 

3.2.3- 5 ISDRA Route Alternatives.3-19 

3.2.3- 6 Gasoducto Bajanorte Pipeline Route Alternative.3-21 

3.2.4- 1 East Mesa North Route Variation.3-23 

3.2.4- 2 Imperial Valley Route Variations.3-25 

3.2.5- 1 Arrowhead Alternative.3-28 

4.1.2- 1 Principal Faults of the Colorado Desert Province and Seismic Activity Near 

the Project Area.4-4 

4.1.4- 1 Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Map.4-15 

4.2.2- 1 Map Unit Identifiers Crossed by the B-Line.4-29 

4.2.2- 2 Map Unit Identifiers Crossed by the IID Lateral.4-30 

4.8.4- 1 Location of Special Management Areas in Relation to BLM Land and the 

Proposed Pipeline Routes.4-149 


xi 



























ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS 


°C 

°F 

ACECs 

ACEEE 

ACHP 

ADEQ 

Agency Staffs 

AGFD 

amsl 

AQMD 

AQCRs 

AREMA 

BA 

BACT 

BEI Lateral 

BLM 

BO 

BOR 

Bscfd 

CAA 

CalTrans 

CDC 

CDCA Plan 

CDD 

CDFG 

CDMG 

CDWR 

CEC 

CEPA 

CEQ 

CEQA 

Certificate 

CESA 

CFR 

Chevron 

CIPC 

CM&R Plan 
CNDDB 
CNPS 
CO 

co 2 

COE 

COE Manual 
Commission 
CPUC GO 112-E 
CRHR 
CRWQCB 

CSLC 


degrees Celsius 
degrees Fahrenheit 

Areas of Critical Environmental Concern 

American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy 

Advisory Council on Historic Preservation 

Arizona Department of Environmental Quality 

The environmental staffs of the FERC, the CSLC, and the BLM 

Arizona Game and Fish Department 

above mean sea level 

Air Quality Management District 

Air Quality Control Regions 

American Railway Engineering and Maintenance of Way Association 

Biological Assessment 

Best Available Control Technology 

Blythe Energy Interconnect Lateral 

Bureau of Land Management 

Biological Opinion 

Bureau of Reclamation 

billion standard cubic feet per day 

Clean Air Act 

California Department of Transportation 
California Department of Conservation 
California Desert Conservation Area Plan 
California Desert District 
California Department of Fish and Game 
California Division of Mines and Geology 
California Department of Water Resources 
California Energy Commission 
California Environmental Protection Agency 
Council on Environmental Quality 
California Environmental Quality Act 
Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity 
California Endangered Species Act 
Code of Federal Regulations 
Chevron Corporation 
California Invasive Plant Council 
Construction Mitigation and Restoration Plan 
California Natural Diversity Database 
California Native Plant Society 
carbon monoxide 
carbon dioxide 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 
California Public Utilities Commission, General Order 112-E 
California Register of Historical Resources 

California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Colorado River Basin 
Region 

California State Lands Commission 


xii 


ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS (cont’d) 


CSWRCB 

CWA 

dB 

dBA 

DNA 

DOT 

draft EIS/EIR 

Dthd 

DTSC 

DWMA 

ECA 

Ecological Analysis 

EIA 

El 

El Paso 

EPA 

EQH 

ESA 

FR 

FEMA 

FERC 

FIRM 

FLPMA 

FWENC 

FTHLICC 

FWS 

GHG 

HAPs 

HCA 

HDD 

HDD Plan 

HMA 

ICAPCD 

IID 

INGA A 
ISDRA 
ISDRA Plan 
kV 

Ldn 

Leq(24) 

LNG 

LRPC 

LUST 

MACT 

MAOP 

Mar Adentro 

Memorandum 


California State Water Resources Control Board 

Clean Water Act 

Decibel 

decibels on the A-weighted scale 
Decade of North American Geology 
U.S. Department of Transportation 

draft environmental impact statement/environmental impact report and draft 
land use plan amendment 
dekatherms per day 

Department of Toxic Substances and Control 
Desert Wildlife Management Area 
Energia Costa Azul 

An Ecological Analysis of Conservation Priorities in the Sonoran Desert 
Ecoregion 

Energy Information Administration 
Environmental Inspector 
El Paso Natural Gas Company 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 
Earthquake History of the United States 
Endangered Species Act of 1973 
Federal Register 

Federal Emergency Management Agency 

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 

Federal Flood Insurance Rate Maps 

Federal Land Policy and Management Act 

Foster Wheeler Environmental Corporation 

Flat-tailed Horned Lizard Interagency Coordinating Committee 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

greenhouse gas 

Hazardous Air Pollutants 

high consequence area 

horizontal directional drill 

Horizontal Directional Drill Plan 

Herd Management Area 

Imperial County Air Pollution Control District 

Imperial Irrigation District 

Interstate Natural Gas Association of America 

Imperial Sand Dunes Recreation Area 

ISDRA Management Plan 

kilovolt 

day-night equivalent sound level 
24-hour equivalent sound level 
liquefied natural gas 
La Rosita Power Complex 
leaking underground storage tank 
Maximum Achievable Control Technology 
maximum allowable operating pressure 
Terminal GNL Mar Adentro de Baja California 

Memorandum of Understanding on Natural Gas Transportation Facilities 


xm 


ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS (cont’d) 


mg/1 

MMI 

MMP 

MMscfd 

MOA 

MP 

MRZ 

MUCs 

MUIDs 

MWD 

NABCI 

NAFTA 

NAAQS 

NECO 

NECO Plan 

NEPA 

NGA 

NHPA 

NOAA Fisheries 


NOI/NOP 


North Baja 
Notice of Pre-Filing 
Process Review 
NO, 

NO x 

NPDES 

NRCS 

NRHP 

NSAs 

NSR 

NWI 

NWR 

0 3 

OEP 

OHV 

OHV Plan 

OPS 

OSHA 

Pb 

PD 

PHMSA 

PIR 

Plan 

PM 10 

PM 2 .5 


milligrams per liter 
Modified Mercalli Intensity 
mitigation monitoring program 
million standard cubic feet per day 
Memorandum of Agreement 
Milepost 

mineral resources zones 

multiple-use classes 

Map Unit Identifiers 

Metropolitan Water District 

U.S. North American Bird Conservation Initiative 

North American Free Trade Agreement 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

Northern and Eastern Colorado Desert 

Northern and Eastern Colorado Desert Coordinated Management Plan 
National Environmental Policy Act 
Natural Gas Act 

National Historic Preservation Act 

U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service 
Notice of Intent/Preparation to Prepare an Environmental Impact 
Statement/Report and Proposed Land Use Plan Amendment for the 
Proposed North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project, Request for Comments on 
Environmental Issues/Impacts, and Notice of Public Scoping Meetings 
North Baja Pipeline, LLC 

Notice of Pre-Filing Process Review for the North Baja Pipeline Expansion 
Project 

nitrogen dioxide 
nitrogen oxides 

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service 

National Register of Historic Places 

noise-sensitive areas 

Nonattainment New Source Review 

National Wetlands Inventory 

National Wildlife Refuge 

Ozone 

Office of Energy Projects 
off-highway vehicle 

Off-Highway Vehicle Management Plan 
Office of Pipeline Safety 

U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration 
Lead 

Preliminary Determination on Non-Environmental Issues 
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration 
Potential Impact Radius 

FERC’s Upland Erosion Control, Re vegetation, and Maintenance Plan 
particulate matter having an aerodynamic diameter of 10 microns or less 
particulate matter having an aerodynamic diameter of 2.5 microns or less 


xiv 


ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS (cont’d) 


ppm 

ppmw 

PRMM Plan 
Procedures 
Project or proposed 
Project 
PSD 
psig 
PTE 
PVID 
RMPs 
ROD 
RV 
SAA 
SCADA 
SCEDC 
SDG&E 
Secretary 
SEDAB 
Sempra 
SHPO 
SIL 
SIP 
SMA 
SO, 

SO x 

SoCal Gas 
SPCC Plan 

SPPE 

SR 

STATSGO 
SWPPP 
TDM Plant 
TGN 
tpy 

Trans western 

pg/m 3 

UCMP 

use 

USCIS 

USGS 

VOC 

VRM 

WECO 

WECO Plan 

WGCEP 

WHA 

WHMA 


parts per million 

parts per million by weight 

Paleontological Resource Mitigation and Monitoring Plan 

FERC’s Wetland and Waterbody Construction and Mitigation Procedures 

North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

pounds per square inch gauge 

potential to emit 

Palo Verde Irrigation District 

resource management plans 

Record of Decision 

recreational vehicle 

Streambed Alteration Agreement 

Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition 

Southern California Earthquake Data Center 

San Diego Gas and Electric 

Secretary of the Commission 

Southeast Desert Air Basin 

Sempra LNG 

State Historic Preservation Office 
significant impact level 
State Implementation Plans 
Special Management Area 
sulfur dioxide 
sulfur oxides 

Southern California Gas Company 

Spill Prevention, Containment, and Control Plan for Hazardous Materials and 
Wastes 

Small Power Plant Exemption 

State Route 

State Soil Geographic 

Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan 

Termoelectrica de Mexicali Power Plant 

Transportadora de Gas Natural de Baja California 

tons per year 

Transwestern Pipeline Company, LLC 
micrograms per cubic meter 
University of California Museum of Paleontology 
United States Code 

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 
U.S. Geological Service 
volatile organic compounds 
Visual Resource Management 
Western Colorado Desert 

Western Colorado Desert Routes of Travel Designations Plan 
Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities 
Wildlife Habitat Area 
Wildlife Habitat Management Area 


xv 


ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS (cont’d) 


WHMP 

Yuma District Plan 


Wildlife Habitat Management Plan 
Yuma District Resource Management Plan 


xvi 


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 






EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 


The staffs of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission or FERC), the California 
State Lands Commission (CSLC), and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) (Agency Staffs) prepared 
this draft environmental impact statement/environmental impact report and draft land use plan 
amendment (draft EIS/EIR) for the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project (Project or proposed Project) 
to fulfill the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA); the Council on 
Environmental Quality Regulations for implementing NEPA (Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations 
[CFR], Parts 1500-1508); the FERC’s implementing regulations (Title 18 CFR, section 380); the 
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)(Public Resources Code section 21000 et seq.); the CEQA 
implementing guidelines (California Code of Regulations Title 14, section 15000 et seq.); and the Federal 
Land Management and Policy Act. The purpose of this document is to inform the public and the 
permitting agencies about the potential adverse and beneficial environmental impacts of the proposed 
Project and its alternatives, and recommend mitigation measures that would reduce the significant adverse 
impacts to the maximum extent possible, and, where feasible, to a less than significant level. 

The FERC is the lead Federal agency and will use the document to consider the environmental 
impacts that could result if it issues North Baja Pipeline, LLC (North Baja) a Certificate of Public 
Convenience and Necessity (Certificate) and a Presidential Permit amendment under sections 7 and 3, 
respectively, of the Natural Gas Act (NGA). The CSLC is the lead State agency and will use the 
document to consider North Baja’s application to amend its existing right-of-way lease across the State’s 
Sovereign and School Lands in conjunction with the environmental impacts that could result from any 
part of the Project in California. 

The BLM is participating as a cooperating agency in the preparation of this document because the 
Project would cross Federal land under the jurisdiction of the Palm Springs-South Coast, El Centro, and 
Yuma Field Offices. The Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) is also a cooperating agency in the preparation 
of this document because lands administered by the BOR would be crossed by the Project. Under section 
185(f) of the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920, the BLM has the authority to issue Right-of-Way Grants for 
all affected Federal lands. This draft EIS/EIR will be used by the BLM to consider whether to amend 
North Baja’s existing Right-of-Way Grant and issue Temporary Use Permits for the installation of 
approximately 67.4 miles of pipeline and ancillary facilities across Federal lands managed by the BLM, 
the BOR, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). This draft EIS/EIR will also be used by the 
BLM to consider amending the California Desert Conservation Area (CDCA) Plan (as amended), which 
would be necessary for pipeline construction outside of designated utility corridors, as well as amending 
the Yuma District Resource Management Plan (Yuma District Plan), which would be necessary for 
pipeline construction across the Milpitas Wash Special Management Area (SMA). 

The BLM proposes to adopt this draft EIS/EIR per Title 40 CFR Part 1506.3 to meet its 
responsibilities under NEPA and its planning regulations per Title 43 CFR Part 1610. The BLM will 
present separate Records of Decision for the Right-of-Way Grant and the plan amendments for the North 
Baja Pipeline Expansion Project after the issuance of the final environmental impact 
statement)environmental impact report and proposed plan amendment (final EIS/EER). The concurrence 
or non-concurrence of the BOR and the FWS would be considered in the BLM’s decision. 

DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND PROJECT OBJECTIVES 

North Baja proposes to expand its existing natural gas transmission pipeline system between 
Ehrenberg, Arizona and an interconnection at the international border between the United States and 
Mexico. The North Baja system is the U.S. portion of the international North Baja/Gasoducto Bajanorte 
Pipeline Project. North Baja’s existing system extends approximately 79.8 miles from an interconnection 


ES-1 



with the facilities of El Paso Natural Gas Company (El Paso) near Ehrenberg through southeast California 
to a point on the international border between Yuma, Arizona and Mexicali, North Baja Mexico, where 
the pipeline interconnects with the Gasoducto Bajanorte pipeline. The North Baja/Gasoducto Bajanorte 
Pipeline Project was built in 2002 to supply domestic natural gas from the United States primarily to gas- 
fired electric generation facilities in Baja California, Mexico. Since that time, several projects have been 
initiated to build liquefied natural gas (LNG) storage and vaporization terminals on the Baja California 
coast, near the terminus of the Gasoducto Bajanorte pipeline. This new source of natural gas would be 
stored in tanks as LNG at the terminals in Baja California, and then re-gasified (vaporized) and 
transported as natural gas into the North Baja/Gasoducto Bajanorte systems. 

The existing North Baja system is currently certificated by the FERC to transport 512,500 
dekatherms per day (Dthd) of natural gas in a southbound direction. Once completed, the expanded 
system would be capable of transporting up to 2,932,000 Dthd (2,753 million standard cubic feet per day) 
of natural gas from the planned LNG terminals in a northbound direction for delivery to customers in 
California and Arizona. In addition to the new volumes from the LNG terminals. North Baja would 
continue to offer southbound gas transportation service for several existing shippers. The anticipated 
delivery points for the proposed Project are: the Imperial Irrigation District’s (HD’s) existing El Centro 
Generating Station in El Centro, California; the Blythe Energy Facility I supply pipeline and the SoCal 
Gas Company (SoCal Gas) system in Blythe, California; and the El Paso system in Ehrenberg. 

The North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project would involve the construction and operation of a 
pipeline loop, two pipeline laterals, an interconnect pipeline, an odorant facility, two meter stations, 
modifications at North Baja’s existing compressor and meter stations, and installation of mainline and 
lateral valves and pig launchers and receivers. Specifically, North Baja proposes to construct and 
operate: 

• 79.8 miles of pipeline loop (B-Line) adjacent to North Baja’s existing pipeline (A-Line) 
consisting of 11.7 miles of 42-inch-diameter pipeline extending from the existing 
Ehrenberg Compressor Station at milepost (MP) 0.0 in La Paz County, Arizona to the 
existing Rannells Trap at MP 11.7 in Riverside County, California, and 68.1 miles of 48- 
inch-diameter pipeline extending from Rannells Trap to an interconnection at the U.S.- 
Mexico border at MP 79.8 in Imperial County, California; 

• less than 0.1 mile (about 20 feet) of 36-inch-diameter pipeline (SoCal Gas Interconnect) 
to connect the B-Line to the existing SoCal Gas system within the proposed Blythe Meter 
Station site at MP 0.5 in Riverside County; 

• 0.6 mile of 10-inch-diameter pipeline (Blythe Energy Interconnect Lateral [BEI Lateral]) 
extending from the proposed Blythe Meter Station site to an interconnection with the 
existing Blythe Energy Facility I supply pipeline in Riverside County; 

• 45.7 miles of 16-inch-diameter pipeline (IID Lateral) extending from MP 74.5 of the B- 
Line near the existing Ogilby Meter Station to the existing IID El Centro Generating 
Station in Imperial County; 


1 A loop is a segment of pipeline that is usually installed adjacent to an existing pipeline and connected to it at both ends. The loop allows 
more gas to be moved through the system. 

2 A lateral pipeline typically takes gas from the main system to deliver it to a customer, local distribution system, or another interstate 
transmission system. 

3 A pig is an internal tool that can be used to clean and dry a pipeline and/or to inspect it for damage or corrosion. 


ES-2 



• modifications at its existing Ehrenberg Compressor Station and the existing Ogilby Meter 
Station to allow northbound flow of natural gas; 

• metering modifications at its existing El Paso Meter Station at the Ehrenberg Compressor 
Station site to allow LNG-source gas to be delivered into the El Paso system; 

• one meter station (Blythe Meter Station) in Riverside County to measure gas delivery 
from the North Baja system to SoCal Gas and the BEI Lateral; 

• one odorant facility at the existing Ogilby Meter Station to odorize the natural gas before 
delivery into the SoCal Gas system; 

• one meter station (El Centro Meter Station) at the existing IID El Centro Generating 
Station to measure gas delivery from the North Baja system to the IID; 

• one tap where the IID Lateral would connect to the B-Line in Imperial County; 

• three pig launchers, one at Rannells Trap, one at the Ogilby Meter Station, and one where 
the IID Lateral would connect with the B-Line; 

• four pig receivers, one at the Ehrenberg Compressor Station, one at Rannells Trap, one at 
the Ogilby Meter Station, and one at the end of the IID Lateral at the IID El Centro 
Generating Station; 

• nine remote manual valves with automatic shutdown capability on the B-Line, adjacent to 
the existing A-Line valve sites; and 

• four remote manual valves with automatic shutdown capability on the IID Lateral. 

The proposed Project would be constructed in three phases beginning in 2007 and ending in 2009. 
Phase I would involve modifications at the existing Ehrenberg Compressor Station and Ogilby and El 
Paso Meter Stations, and construction of the odorant facility, Blythe Meter Station, SoCal Gas 
Interconnect, and BEI Lateral. Phase I-A would involve the construction of the IID Lateral. Phase II 
would involve the construction of the B-Line adjacent to North Baja’s existing A-Line between Blythe 
and the U.S.-Mexico border. 

PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT AND AREAS OF CONCERN 

On May 19, 2005, North Baja filed a request with the FERC to implement the Commission’s Pre- 
Filing Process for the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project. At that time, North Baja was in the 
preliminary design stage of the Project and no formal application had been filed with the FERC. On June 
2, 2005, the FERC granted North Baja’s request and established a pre-filing docket number (PF05-14- 
000) to place information related to the Project into the public record. The purpose of the Pre-Filing 
Process is to encourage the early involvement of interested stakeholders, facilitate interagency 
cooperation, and identify and resolve issues before an application is filed with the FERC. The CSLC, the 
BLM, and the BOR agreed to conduct their environmental reviews of the Project in conjunction with the 
Commission’s Pre-Filing Process. 

As part of the Pre-Filing Process, North Baja mailed notification letters to landowners, 
government and agency officials, and the general public informing them about the Project and inviting 
them to attend open houses on July 6 and 7, 2005 to leam about the Project and to ask questions and 


ES-3 


express their concerns. Notifications of the open houses were also published in local newspapers. The 
open houses were held in Blythe, El Centro, and Calexico, California. The Agency Staffs attended the 
open houses to explain the NEPA/CEQA environmental review process to interested stakeholders and 
take comments about the Project. 

In June and August of 2005, the Agency Staffs issued two separate notices that described the 
proposed Project and invited written comments on the environmental issues to be addressed in the 
EIS/EIR. The June 2005 notice announced the dates and locations of North Baja’s three open houses. 
The August 2005 notice announced two public scoping meetings that were held in Blythe and El Centro 
on September 28 and 29, 2005, respectively. These notices were sent to Federal, State, and local 
agencies; elected officials; environmental and public interest groups; Native American tribes; affected 
landowners; local libraries and newspapers; and other stakeholders in the region who had indicated an 
interest in the Project. 

On September 27, 28, and 29, 2005, the FERC and CSLC staffs conducted interagency scoping 
meetings in the Project area to solicit comments and concerns about the Project from other jurisdictional 
agencies. Agencies present at the meetings were the FWS, Carlsbad Office; the FWS, Cibola National 
Wildlife Refuge (NWR); the BLM; and the BOR. 

On March 10, 2006, the FERC and the CSLC sent a letter and a copy of the August 2005 notice 
to potentially affected landowners on 18th Avenue in Riverside County that inadvertently had not been 
included on the environmental mailing list. The letter solicited comments about the proposed Project 
from the potentially affected landowners to provide them an opportunity to participate in the 
environmental review process. 

Transcripts of the public scoping meetings, a summary of the interagency scoping meetings, and 
all written scoping comments are part of the public record for the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 
and are available for viewing on the FERC Internet website (http://www.ferc.gov). 4 The most frequently 
raised issues were related to impacts on air quality in Imperial County as a result of the existing and 
proposed upstream facilities in Mexico and the cumulative impact of the proposed Project when 
considered in association with past, present, and future projects or activities. Other issues of concern 
included impacts on special status species and native vegetation and the development of mitigation 
measures to minimize and compensate for these impacts. Comments relating to safety, protection of 
surface waters, cultural resources, alternatives, and the effects of the Project on off-highway vehicle 
(OHV) use were also received. 

This draft EIS/EIR was filed with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA); submitted to 
the California State Clearinghouse; and mailed to Federal, State, and local government agencies; elected 
officials; Native American tribes; affected landowners; local libraries and newspapers; intervenors 5 in the 
FERC’s proceeding; and other interested parties (i.e., miscellaneous individuals who provided scoping 
comments or asked to be on the mailing list). A formal notice indicating that the draft EIS/EIR was 
available for review and comment was published in the Federal Register and posted in the appropriate 
County Clerks’ offices in California. The typical NEPA/CEQA comment period for a draft EIS/EIR is 45 
days. However, because the draft EIS/EIR is also a BLM draft land use plan amendment, the public has 
90 days after the date of publication in the Federal Register to review and comment on the draft EIS/EER 
both in the form of written comments and at two public meetings to be held in the Project area. All 


4 Using the “eLibrary” link, select “General Search” from the eLibrary menu and enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the 
“Docket Number” field (i.e., PF05-14 and CP06-61). Be sure to select an appropriate date range. 

5 Intervenors are official parties to the proceeding and have the right to receive copies of case-related Commission documents and filings by 
other intervenors. Likewise, each intervenor must provide 14 copies of its filings to the Secretary of the Commission and must send a copy 
of its filings to all other intervenors. Only intervenors have the right to seek rehearing of the Commission’s decision. 


ES-4 



comments received on the draft EIS/EIR related to environmental issues will be addressed in the final 
EIS/EIR. 


ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES 

The environmental impacts associated with construction and operation of the North Baja Pipeline 
Expansion Project are analyzed in this EIS/EIR using information provided by North Baja and further 
developed from data requests; field investigations; scoping; literature research; alternatives analysis; 
contacts with Federal, State, and local agencies; and input from public groups and organizations. The 
Agency Staffs’ analysis indicates that the Project would result in certain adverse environmental impacts. 

North Baja has prepared specific plans that include measures to mitigate potential impacts. These 
plans include: 


• Construction Mitigation and Restoration Plan (CM&R Plan); 

• Spill Prevention, Containment, and Control Plan for Hazardous Materials and Wastes 
(SPCC Plan); 

• Horizontal Directional Drill Plan (HDD Plan); 

• Traffic Management Plans; 

• Blasting Specifications; 

• Paleontological Resource Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (PRMM Plan); 

• Dust Control Plan; 

• Fire Prevention and Suppression Plan; 

• Site-specific Residential Construction Mitigation Plans; 

• Off-highway Vehicle Management Plan (OHV Plan); and 

• Unanticipated Discovery Plan for Cultural Resources. 

Specific mitigation measures that are feasible were identified as part of the environmental 
analysis. When implemented, these measures would reduce most potential adverse impacts of Project 
construction and operation to a less than significant level. A table listing the anticipated impacts of the 
proposed Project and measures that would be implemented to mitigate those impacts is included in 
Section 5. The environmental effects of constructing and operating the proposed Project are summarized 
below. 

Geology 

The proposed Project is located within the Colorado Desert geomorphic province, commonly 
referred to as the “low desert” in southern California. Construction and operation of the proposed 
pipeline and aboveground facilities would not materially alter the geologic conditions of the Project area. 
Effects from construction could include disturbances to the natural topography along the right-of-way and 
at aboveground facilities due to grading and trenching activities. After completion of construction, North 


ES-5 



Baja would restore topographic contours and drainage conditions as closely as feasible to their 
preconstruction condition. 

Seismicity includes active faults, ground shaking, and soil liquefaction, and is the primary 
geologic hazard that could affect the proposed Project facilities. Seismic events in the vicinity of the 
Project are centered on fault activity in the Salton Trough. The potential for strong ground accelerations 
in the immediate vicinity of the proposed B-Line and BEI Lateral is generally low; however, several 
faults and fault zones are proximal to the proposed IID Lateral and have the potential for generating 
earthquakes that could cause strong ground motions. Damage to buried pipelines is most often caused by 
the differential movements of geologic material as opposed to shaking itself. 

Results from the Liquefaction Hazard Evaluation and Mitigation Study North Baja performed in 
2001 for the A-Line indicate that a major earthquake of magnitude 7.0 or greater originating on the San 
Andreas or Imperial Faults would create a high probability for soil liquefaction at the Arizona side of the 
Colorado River crossing and on the western portion of the 18th Avenue alignment. To mitigate the 
potential for liquefaction, North Baja incorporated the recommendations of the Liquefaction Hazard 
Evaluation and Mitigation Study into the design for the proposed Project. At the Colorado River, 
liquefiable soils would be avoided by use of the horizontal directional drill (HDD) crossing method. 

The liquefaction study included as part of the Geologic Hazards Study conducted for the 
proposed Project concluded that in addition to the areas identified along the B-Line, there are areas of 
locally high liquefaction potential along the IID Lateral. In particular, areas along the East Mesa 
(between MPs 8.0 and 27.0) and in the Imperial Valley (between MPs 27.0 and 45.7) would have a 
locally or generally high potential for liquefaction based on soil type and potential for ground shaking. 
North Baja would design and construct the IID Lateral to be earthquake resistant. 

To further mitigate and reduce potential damage to the proposed facilities from earthquakes. 
North Baja’s facility design would comply with Federal standards outlined in Title 49 CFR Part 192 
Transportation of Natural and Other Gas by Pipeline: Minimum Federal Safety Standards. This code 
governs the construction and operation of natural gas pipelines, greatly reducing the potential risk of 
damage. The pipelines and associated facilities would be designed using the Guidelines for the Design of 
Buried Steel Pipe (American Lifelines Alliance 2001), Guidelines for the Seismic Design and Assessment 
of Natural Gas and Liquid Hydrocarbon Pipelines (Pipeline Research Council International, Inc. 2004), 
applicable building codes, and/or other similar recognized seismological engineering standards. The 
engineering design drawings for the entire Project in California would be certified by a California- 
registered civil/structural engineer, and would comply with the latest edition of the California Building 
Code. 


North Baja has committed to perform a site-specific seismic evaluation as part of its detailed 
design phase for the Project. This evaluation would determine the engineering/design solutions that are 
appropriate to mitigate against the hazard of seismic displacements along the Imperial Fault. The seismic 
evaluation would determine recommended design fault displacements for the pipeline design 
specifications. North Baja would develop a computer model to determine the soil-pipe interaction with 
the proposed applied displacement. The model would evaluate various combinations of pipe wall 
thickness and pipe grade to determine which pattern yields the best performance under displacement 
conditions. The design may also incorporate additional mitigation methods if necessary. North Baja 
would provide a copy of the final design for the Imperial Fault crossing, as well as any related 
geotechnical information, to the CSLC and the FERC before construction of the IID Lateral. 

Implementation of these mitigation measures would reduce potential impacts from geologic 
hazards to less than significant levels. 


ES-6 


The stratigraphic units that would be crossed by the BEI Lateral and the IID Lateral have a low 
potential to yield paleontological resources; therefore, construction of these facilities is not expected to 
impact paleontological resources. Although the B-Line route crosses several rock formations that have 
the potential to contain significant paleontological resources where construction activities could directly 
and/or indirectly damage, disturb, or result in the loss of these resources, the paleontological monitoring 
conducted during the construction of the A-Line revealed a very limited presence of paleontological 
resources. Only about a 1-mile-long stretch from MPs 28.1 to 29.1 yielded a single significant 
paleontological find during construction of the A-Line. Other areas of older Pleistocene alluvium 
between MPs 35.0 and 75.2 yielded only occasional paleontological materials and no significant finds. 

To address potential impacts on paleontological resources resulting from Project construction, 
North Baja developed a PRMM Plan. The PRMM Plan includes a summary of the literature and museum 
archival review, field survey, and assessment of potential impacts on paleontological resources; Project¬ 
wide and site-specific mitigation and monitoring measures; and curation and reporting procedures. 
Implementation of North Baja’s PRMM Plan would reduce potential impacts on paleontological 
resources to less than significant levels. 

Soils 


About 7 percent of the soils that would be crossed by the B-Line may exhibit shallow depth to 
bedrock. Based on North Baja’s experience during construction of the A-line, shallow bedrock would be 
a concern primarily in the vicinity of MP 29.5 and would likely require blasting in order to excavate the 
trench through this area. All blasting activities would be conducted in strict compliance with North 
Baja’s Blasting Specifications and in accordance with Federal, State, and local regulations regarding use, 
storage, and transport of explosives; safety; and environmental protection. Implementation of these 
measures would reduce the impacts of blasting on soils to less than significant levels. 

Other soil limitations that would be encountered during construction of the Project include 491.5 
acres of soils with high water erosion potential. The majority of these soils would occur along the B-Line 
( 454.4 acres), with 0.7 acre affected along the BEI Lateral, and 36.4 acres affected along the DD Lateral. 
In addition, a total of 354.6 acres of soils along the B-Line (162.9 acres) and ED Lateral (191.7 acres) 
routes exhibit high wind erosion potential. 

Construction of the pipelines and aboveground facilities could expose soils to erosional forces, 
compact soils, affect soil fertility, and facilitate the dispersal and establishment of weeds. North Baja 
proposes to mitigate these potential impacts by implementing a CM&R Plan that was developed in 
consultation with the appropriate land management agencies and addresses the special issues associated 
with construction and restoration in an arid environment; an SPCC Plan to address preventive and 
mitigative measures to minimize the potential for soil contamination from spills or leaks of fuels, 
lubricants, and coolants used during construction; and a Dust Control Plan to prevent soil loss due to wind 
erosion. Implementation of these plans would reduce impacts on soil resources to less than significant 
levels. 


Modifications at the Ehrenberg Compressor Station, including the proposed pig receiver and El 
Paso Meter Station, would be completed within the existing fencelines and would not permanently affect 
additional soil resources. Construction of the Blythe Meter Station would result in the permanent loss of 
4.3 acres of land that is mapped as farmland of local importance but is not currently used for agriculture. 
This loss would be much less than 0.1 percent of the agricultural lands in the Palo Verde Valley and 
would be less than significant. 


ES-7 


The pig launcher and receiver proposed for Rannells Trap would require a permanent expansion 
of the existing site by 0.3 acre. Modifications at the Ogilby Meter Station, including the proposed 
odorant facility and pig launcher and receiver, would permanently affect about 0.4 acre of soils outside 
the existing fenced facility. The tap to the B-line and pig launcher associated with the IID Lateral would 
permanently affect 0.2 acre of soils. The El Centro Meter Station and pig receiver would permanently 
affect about 0.2 acre of soils during operation, all located within the existing fenceline of the IID El 
Centro Power Generating Station. No prime farmland or farmlands of Statewide or local importance 
would be affected by these aboveground facility sites. 

In total, 65.4 acres of prime farmland or farmlands of Statewide or local importance would be 
temporarily affected along the B-Line. Along the BEI Lateral, 0.1 acre of farmland of local importance 
would be crossed between MPs 0.0 and 0.5; however, this land is fallow and not currently used for 
agricultural purposes. About 21.7 acres of soils identified as prime farmland or farmlands of Statewide or 
local importance would be disturbed during construction of the IID Lateral. These impacts would be 
temporary and no permanent impacts on prime farmland or farmlands of Statewide or local importance 
would occur in association with the construction and operation of the pipelines. North Baja would avoid 
significant impacts on prime farmland or farmlands of Statewide or local importance by locating the B- 
Line and IID Lateral facilities in road shoulders adjacent to agricultural areas. Impacts that would occur 
on these soils and other active farmlands would be mitigated by segregating 1 to 2 feet of topsoil before 
installation of the pipeline and reapplying topsoil over the surface of the right-of-way during restoration 
as outlined in the CM&R Plan. 

In addition, North Baja would implement a post-construction crop monitoring program to 
maintain the level of production of the affected soils. The program would evaluate crop productivity and 
success for a period of at least 2 years following construction. North Baja would prepare activity reports 
during this period documenting any problems identified by North Baja or the landowner and describing 
corrective actions taken to remedy these problems. These reports would be submitted to the FERC and 
the CSLC on a quarterly basis, as stipulated in the CM&R Plan. The FERC and CSLC staffs would also 
monitor the right-of-way after construction. If after 2 years it is determined that cropland crossed by the 
pipeline has not been restored successfully, North Baja would implement additional restoration measures. 
Implementation of North Baja’s CM&R Plan would reduce impacts on agricultural land to less than 
significant levels. 

Water Resources 

For the majority of the Project, groundwater levels are generally well below the land surface that 
would be affected by construction activities. Shallow aquifers underlying a portion of the construction 
area (e.g., the Palo Verde Valley and portions of the route near the Cibola NWR, and the Imperial Valley) 
could experience minor impacts from clearing, grading, trenching, dewatering, soil mixing, and 
compaction that could temporarily alter overland flow and groundwater recharge. Near-surface soil 
mixing and compaction caused by heavy construction vehicles could also reduce the soil's ability to 
absorb water. These impacts would be temporary and minor and would not significantly affect 
groundwater resources or groundwater quality. In accordance with North Baja’s CM&R Plan, vegetation 
would be cleared only where necessary. Upon completion of construction, North Baja would restore the 
ground surface as closely as practicable to original contours and allow vegetation to regenerate to provide 
restoration of preconstruction overland flow and recharge patterns. North Baja has prepared an SPCC 
Plan to address preventive and mitigative measures that would be used during construction to minimize 
the potential for a hazardous spill to contaminate groundwater resources. Routine operation and 
maintenance of the Project facilities would not result in disturbance or contamination of groundwater 
resources. 


ES-8 


Ten water wells have been identified within 150 feet of the pipeline centerlines. All of these 
wells would be along the B-Line. Potential impacts on wells within 150 feet of the construction work 
area could include: localized decreases in groundwater recharge rates, changes to overland water flow, 
contamination due to hazardous materials spills, decreased well yields, decreased water quality (such as 
an increase in turbidity or odor in the water), interference with well mechanics, or complete disruption of 
the well. These impacts could result from trenching, equipment traffic, or blasting. 

Before construction, North Baja would conduct a field survey to verify the location of any water 
wells that are identified within 150 feet of the construction work area. With the landowner’s permission, 
North Baja would test these water wells before construction to determine baseline flow conditions. 
Where impacts are reported by landowners, North Baja would conduct post-construction water well tests. 
If it is determined that construction activities have impaired a well’s water quality or yield, North Baja 
would either provide bottled water for drinking and arrange for an alternate source of water (such as a 
water truck) for other household uses, temporarily relocate the landowner until the water supply is 
restored, or compensate the landowner for losses. If water quality or yield is permanently impaired as a 
result of construction activities, North Baja would arrange for a new well to be drilled or compensate the 
landowner. 

The proposed Project would cross 2 perennial waterbodies (the Colorado and Alamo Rivers), 70 
man-made irrigation canals and drains, and 265 desert washes. Only the Colorado River has a fisheries 
classification (warmwater). Impacts on the Colorado River and two of the canals (the All-American 
Canal and the East Highline Canal) would be minimized through the use of the HDD crossing method. 
The HDD method involves installation of the pipe under the waterbody and therefore avoids disturbance 
to the bends and banks of the waterbody. The primary impact that could occur as a result of an HDD 
crossing is an inadvertent release of drilling mud directly or indirectly into the waterbody. North Baja has 
prepared an HDD Plan that describes how North Baja would conduct and monitor the drilling operations 
to minimize the potential for inadvertent drilling mud releases and includes procedures for corrective 
action and cleanup of drilling mud releases should one occur to land. The Agency Staffs have 
recommended that North Baja revise its HDD Plan to include specific procedures for corrective action 
and cleanup of drilling mud releases should one occur in the Colorado River or one of the canals. 

Impacts on the Alamo River would be minimized by North Baja’s proposal to install the pipeline 
in the road shoulder over the culverts that carry the water under the road. North Baja would cross all but 
one of the canals and drains either by boring underneath the culverts or by installing the pipeline between 
the drain culverts and a road bed. Rannells Drain would be the only irrigation canal or drain crossed by 
the use of the open-cut crossing technique. The construction and restoration measures in North Baja’s 
CM&R Plan would minimize Project-related disturbances to all waterbodies crossed by the pipeline 
routes. 


The majority of the waterbodies that would be crossed are dry washes that do not support 
fisheries, provide critical aquatic habitat, provide migratory passage for aquatic organisms, or have 
California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Colorado River Basin Region- (CRWQCB) designated 
recreation/high quality visual resource values. North Baja would cross these dry washes with typical 
cross-country construction methods using the same techniques that were implemented to construct the A- 
Line. Impacts on dry washes would be limited to the temporary alteration of beds and banks, loss of 
wildlife habitat, and possibly increased sediment load during initial storm events following construction. 
As part of its Streambed Alteration Agreement with the California Department of Fish and Game 
(CDFG), North Baja would provide offsite, compensatory mitigation for disturbances to wildlife habitats 
located between the banks of dry desert washes. 


ES-9 


Implementation of North Baja’s SPCC Plan, revised HDD Plan, and CM&R Plan would reduce 
impacts on water resources to less than significant levels. 

Wetlands 

The proposed pipeline facilities would cross 18 palustrine emergent or palustrine scrub-shrub 
wetlands under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE). No wetlands would be 
affected by the aboveground facilities. Eight of the 18 wetlands crossed would be left undisturbed by use 
of the HDD method, bore method, or by installing the pipeline in the road shoulder outside the wetland 
boundary. North Baja would use the open-cut method to cross the remaining 10 wetlands implementing 
the construction and restoration procedures outlined in its CM&R Plan. These activities would result in a 
short-term disturbance of 35.7 acres of wetlands. Of this total, about 26.9 acres were previously 
disturbed during construction of the A-Line. Adherence to North Baja’s CM&R Plan and its compliance 
with the COE's section 404 and the CRWQCB’s section 401 permit conditions would reduce impacts on 
wetland resources crossed by the pipeline routes to less than significant levels. 

Vegetation 

Construction activities would result in disturbances of about 1,515.8 acres of vegetation. The 
most common vegetation communities that would be affected are creosote bush scrub (943.7 acres) and 
urban/ruderal (369.7 acres), which account for about 87 percent of the vegetation that would be cleared or 
affected by construction. The next most common communities that would be disturbed are desert wash 
woodland (82.9 acres) and agriculture (78.4 acres) accounting for about 11 percent of the affected 
vegetation. The least common vegetation community that would be affected is desert sand dunes (41.1 
acres), which accounts for less than 3 percent of the vegetation that would be disturbed by the 
construction of the pipeline facilities. Areas of riparian vegetation would be avoided by the Project. 

The agricultural community would typically regenerate quickly and impacts on these vegetation 
communities would be short term. Cultivated areas are regularly disturbed, generally receive ample water 
through irrigation if necessary, and would quickly re-establish on the right-of-way following replanting 
by the landowners. The removal of desert vegetation would have a long-term impact. The arid 
environment characteristic of these habitats is not conducive to plant growth and would slow the 
regeneration of vegetation following construction. Moreover, because of the dryness of these areas, 
regeneration by active seeding or planting is typically ineffective. Natural regeneration of these areas 
would take several years and in some cases could take over 50 years. 

Of the vegetation communities that would be disturbed, the most sensitive is the desert wash 
woodland, which would be crossed by the B-Line. Desert wash species growing in microphyll woodland, 
such as ironwood, blue palo verde, and smoke tree, provide structural diversity, cover, and forage for 
many more wildlife species than the creosote bush scrub habitat. Of the total 82.9 acres of desert wash 
woodland that would be cleared, 22.0 acres (about 26 percent) would be new disturbance (i.e., not 
disturbed during construction of the A-Line). 

North Baja would minimize tree clearing by reducing the width of the construction right-of-way 
from 105 feet to 80 feet in 16 woodland areas crossed by the proposed route. Trees that cannot be 
avoided would be subjected to one of several treatments (prune, limb, or remove) based on proximity to 
the pipeline centerline. By pruning or limbing trees rather than removing them, many trees within the 
right-of-way would be preserved. The reduction of the right-of-way width in these 16 areas would 
preserve 5.6 acres of desert wash woodland trees, which would reduce the amount of new clearing in 
desert wash woodlands by about 20 percent. 


ES-10 


The CM&R Plan is specifically designed for minimizing and restoring disturbances to native 
vegetation and includes a Desert Restoration Plan. The Desert Restoration Plan was developed in 
consultation with the BLM, the FWS, and the CDFG and describes the procedures that were successful 
during construction of the A-Line that would be implemented during construction of the B-Line to 
preserve and restore habitat values affected by pipeline construction in the desert environment. Some of 
these procedures include: preserving the native seed bank by segregating topsoil to a depth of 2 to 8 
inches in non-agricultural areas where grading would be conducted, and redistributing material over the 
right-of-way during cleanup; preserving and redistributing cut vegetation over the right-of-way; 
restricting grading and crushing or cutting of vegetation where possible, leaving rootstock and minimizing 
soil disturbance; and imprinting areas with a sheepsfoot or similar device to provide indentations to catch 
water/seed and anchor native plant material that has been respread over the right-of-way, thereby aiding 
in natural revegetation and erosion control. The Agency Staffs have recommended that North Baja revise 
its CM&R Plan to incorporate provisions for limited testing for compaction in desert areas, and measures 
to alleviate compaction if compaction is identified. 

After construction, North Baja would monitor the entire pipeline route to determine the success of 
restoration of desert vegetation. In native desert habitats, restoration would be considered successful if 
the right-of-way is similar in species composition to adjacent undisturbed lands. This post-construction 
monitoring would be conducted annually in areas of desert vegetation disturbed by construction through 
2012. Results of the monitoring would be provided in reports to the FERC, the BLM, the CSLC, and the 
CDFG. 


Implementation of North Baja’s revised CM&R Plan and post-construction monitoring program 
would reduce potential impacts on vegetation to less than significant levels. 

The removal of existing vegetation and the disturbance of soils during construction could create 
optimal conditions for the invasion and establishment of exotic-nuisance species. Construction 
equipment traveling from invasive weed-infested areas into weed-free areas could also facilitate the 
dispersal of invasive weed seed and propagules and result in the establishment of noxious weeds in weed- 
free areas. Botanical surveys conducted before construction of the A-Line identified four invasive weed 
species in significant numbers including African mustard, Australian saltbush, fountain grass, and 
tamarisk. North Baja conducted post-construction weed and revegetation surveys for the A-Line, the 
most recent of which occurred in the Spring of 2005. The surveys indicate that although weeds 
(specifically mustard and tamarisk) have reoccurred in areas where they were present before construction 
of the A-Line, they have not spread to new areas along the right-of-way. Additionally, the surveys 
indicate that fountain grass has been eliminated from the right-of-way. Tamarisk has been identified 
along the BEI Lateral route. North Baja has not yet provided information regarding noxious weed species 
that may occur along the IID Lateral route; however, in accordance with the CM&R Plan, surveys for 
noxious weeds along the IID Lateral would be conducted before construction. 

North Baja’s CM&R Plan includes measures to minimize the spread of invasive exotic species 
that were developed in consultation with the appropriate natural resource agencies. The CM&R Plan does 
not, however, include a measure to employ wash stations along the construction right-of-way to clean 
equipment moving from weed-infested areas to non-weed-infested native areas. The Agency Staffs 
believe that weed stations could be effective in preventing the spread of weed species in locations where 
weed populations are adjacent to areas that are relatively free of weeds. The Agency Staffs have 
recommended that North Baja revise its CM&R Plan to include a plan for weed wash stations to be 
established along the construction right-of-way to clean all equipment after working in weed-infested 
areas prior to entering non-weed-infested areas. 


ES-11 


North Baja would conduct surveys for non-native plant species after construction is complete to 
determine locations of weed infestations attributable to the Project. North Baja would conduct these 
surveys and implement control measures (e.g., herbicide application, pulling by hand as permitted by 
landowner or land management agency) at Project-related infestations twice a year for 2 years after 
construction is complete or until the infestations have been controlled. North Baja would also implement 
weed control measures annually as part of routine operation and maintenance. 

Implementation of North Baja’s revised CM&R Plan and post-construction monitoring program 
would reduce potential impacts associated with the spread of noxious weeds to less than significant levels. 

Wildlife and Aquatic Resources 

The primary impact of the Project on wildlife habitat, including habitat for migratory birds, would 
be the cutting, clearing, and/or removal of existing vegetation within the construction work area. 
Construction through agricultural areas would have the least impact. As discussed above, cultivated areas 
are regularly disturbed, receive ample water through irrigation, and would quickly reestablish on the 
right-of-way following replanting by the farmers. The removal of desert vegetation would result in the 
long-term loss of habitat for those species that utilize native vegetation communities. North Baja’s 
CM&R Plan includes measures to avoid or minimize impacts on wildlife habitats as well as facilitate the 
recovery of native vegetation communities. North Baja’s proposed conservation measures to minimize or 
avoid impacts on special status species would also serve to avoid, minimize, or compensate for impacts 
on general wildlife and their habitats. 

The clearing of vegetation during the nesting season could have direct impacts on individual 
migratory birds. North Baja would attempt to schedule construction in native habitats outside of the 
breeding season for migratory birds. If, however, construction activities are necessary during the bird 
breeding season, in accordance with its CM&R Plan, North Baja would remove vegetation that could 
provide nesting substrate from the right-of-way before the breeding season. The Agency Staffs have 
recommended that North Baja consult with the FWS, the BLM, and the CDFG to develop a Preclearing 
Plan that includes specific details of the preclearing methods to be implemented, the specific locations 
where preclearing would occur, and the dates preclearing would be initiated and completed for each phase 
of construction. Qualified biologists would conduct preconstruction surveys to confirm the absence of 
nesting birds before construction begins. If, in spite of vegetation removal, nesting birds are found on the 
construction right-of-way, the nest would not be removed until fledging has occurred or unless authorized 
after consultation with the FWS, the CDFG, and, if the nest is located on Federal lands, the Federal land 
management agency. 

Fires inadvertently started by construction activities could also affect wildlife in the Project area 
by igniting vegetation along the right-of-way. This habitat loss could cause crowding in adjacent habitats 
reducing productivity and increasing stress-induced mortality. North Baja has developed a Fire 
Prevention and Suppression Plan to minimize the potential for wildfires. 

Implementation of North Baja’s CM&R Plan, the Preclearing Plan to protect nesting migratory 
birds, and the Fire Prevention and Suppression Plan would reduce the impacts of the Project on wildlife to 
less than significant levels. 

Pipeline construction or operation would not directly affect aquatic resources. An inadvertent 
chemical or fuel spill in or near a waterbody could release contaminants, which could affect fish through 
changes in food sources or by contaminating the water resources. North Baja’s adherence to its CM&R 
Plan and SPCC Plan would reduce the potential of a spill and decrease the response time for control and 


ES-12 


cleanup of a spill, should one occur. Therefore, the probability of a spill of hazardous materials would be 
small and the impact on fisheries would be less than significant. 

Special Status Species 

The FWS identified nine federally listed endangered or threatened species that could potentially 
occur in the general vicinity of the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project. The Agency Staffs have 
determined that, with implementation of North Baja’s proposed minimization and conservation measures, 
its CM&R Plan, and the Agency Staffs’ additional recommendations, the Project would have no effect on 
four species (desert pupfish, bonytail chub, brown pelican, bald eagle) and would not likely adversely 
affect three species (razorback sucker, southwestern willow flycatcher, Yuma clapper rail). The proposed 
Project is likely to adversely affect the Peirson’s milk-vetch and the desert tortoise and its designated 
critical habitat. As such, impacts on these species would be considered significant. 

This draft EIS/EIR is serving as the Biological Assessment that is necessary for compliance with 
section 7 of the Endangered Species Act. Copies of this draft EIS/EIR have been sent to the FWS along 
with a letter requesting concurrence with the determinations of effect and initiation of formal 
consultation. As part of the section 7 formal consultation process, the FWS is expected to issue a 
Biological Opinion (BO) regarding whether the Project would jeopardize the continued existence of the 
Peirson’s milk-vetch and the desert tortoise. The BO would contain the FWS’ non-discretionary terms 
and conditions in order to ensure that the Project would not jeopardize the continued existence of these 
species or critical habitat for the desert tortoise. North Baja would not be authorized to make any 
irreversible or irretrievable commitments of resources that would foreclose formulation or 
implementation of any reasonable or prudent alternatives needed to avoid jeopardizing the continued 
existence of these species and adverse modification of critical habitat for the desert tortoise. North Baja 
would be prohibited from beginning construction until the FWS’ BO is received and the FERC and CSLC 
staffs have approved the start of construction. 

Forty-two other special status species were identified as potentially occurring within the Project 
area. Based on the results of habitat evaluations and species-specific surveys, 18 of these special status 
species potentially occur in the area that would be impacted by construction of the Project. North Baja’s 
implementation of general and species-specific conservation measures and the Agency Staffs’ additional 
recommendations would allow the Project to avoid, minimize, or compensate for Project impacts on these 
species. Therefore, with one exception, impacts would be less than significant. The Agency Staffs 
believe that impacts on the flat-tailed homed lizard and its habitat would be considered significant. 

Land Use, Special Management Areas, Recreation and Public Interest Areas, and Aesthetic 
Resources 

Approximately 99 percent of the pipeline facilities would be constructed in or adjacent to various 
existing rights-of-way, including about 63 percent (the B-Line) that would be installed generally 25 feet 
from North Baja’s existing A-Line. In most areas, about 80 feet of the construction right-of-way for the 
B-Line would overlap the area previously disturbed during construction of the A-Line. No new 
permanent right-of-way would be required for the B-Line. 

Construction of the pipeline facilities would temporarily affect about 1,551.5 acres of land. 
About 858.5 acres (55 percent) of land is previously disturbed area associated with construction and 
operation of the A-Line. Open land would be the primary land use affected by construction of the 
pipeline facilities totaling about 1,103.4 acres (71 percent). The remaining land uses that would be 
disturbed consist of 369.7 acres (24 percent) of anthropogenic (i.e., transportation and 
industrial/commercial/utility uses) land and 78.4 acres (5 percent) of agricultural land. Most of this land 


ES-13 


would be allowed to return to previous uses after construction is completed; however, about 102.9 acres 
of open land and anthropogenic land would be retained as new permanent right-of-way. Modifications at 
existing and construction of new aboveground facilities associated with the proposed Project would affect 
9.7 acres of open and anthropogenic land. Of the 9.7 acres, 5.4 acres would be permanently converted for 
operation of these facilities. The permanent conversion of open and anthropogenic land for the pipeline 
and aboveground facilities would not convert more than 1 percent of agricultural lands in a county to a 
non-agricultural use and, therefore, would be less than significant. 

There are 39 residences and 6 businesses located within 100 feet of the construction work areas 
for the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project. All of these establishments are located along 18th 
Avenue, Riviera Drive, and various Imperial County roadways where North Baja proposes to install the 
pipelines in the paved road or abutting road shoulders. Temporary impacts during construction of the 
pipeline facilities in residential areas could include: inconvenience caused by noise and dust generated by 
construction equipment and traffic, and by trenching of roads or driveways; increased localized traffic; 
ground disturbance of lawns; removal of trees, landscape shrubs, or other vegetative screening between 
residences and adjacent rights-of-way; and potential damage to existing septic systems or wells. North 
Baja has prepared Site-specific Residential Construction Mitigation Plans and proposes additional 
mitigation measures to minimize impacts on residents. North Baja has also prepared Traffic Management 
Plans in consultation with Riverside and Imperial Counties to minimize disruptions to the flow of traffic 
along 18th Avenue and Imperial County roadways and a Dust Control Plan to minimize the nuisance of 
fugitive dust. 

North Baja’s Site-specific Residential Construction Mitigation Plans and additional proposed 
mitigation measures, including the Traffic Management Plans and the Dust Control Plan, would reduce 
the potential impacts of construction on residences to less than significant levels. 

The proposed pipelines would cross three special management areas administered by the BLM: 
the CDCA, the Milpitas Wash SMA, and the Imperial Sand Dunes Recreation Area (ISDRA). A CDCA 
Plan amendment would be needed for approximately 27.6 miles of BLM-managed land that would be 
crossed by the B-Line (20.8 miles) and the IID Lateral (6.8 miles) outside of a designated utility corridor 
within the CDCA. The B-Line would be entirely adjacent to North Baja’s existing A-Line, which was the 
subject of an amendment to the CDCA Plan and previously approved by the BLM in 2002. The portion 
of the IID Lateral outside of designated utility corridors would be within or adjacent to existing 
transportation (Interstate 8 and Evan Hewes Highway) and transmission line rights-of-way. An 
amendment to the Yuma District Plan would be needed for approximately 2.5 miles of BLM-managed 
land outside a designated utility corridor that would be crossed by the B-Line within the Milpitas Wash 
SMA. The B-Line would be entirely adjacent to North Baja’s existing A-Line, which was the subject of 
an amendment to the Yuma District Plan and previously approved by the BLM in 2002. The portions of 
the proposed Project requiring a BLM plan amendment are shown on Figure ES-1. The amendments for 
the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project would only accommodate the proposed Project and would not 
conflict with the CDCA Plan and the Yuma District Plan. Therefore, the proposed plan amendments 
would not be a significant impact. 

The ISDRA was created in 1977 for the purpose of providing a formal space for OHV use. The 
ISDRA Management Plan was approved and adopted as an amendment to the CDCA Plan in March 2005. 
The B-Line would be in the ISDRA between MPs 71.1 and 74.5 and the IID Lateral would be in the 
ISDRA between MPs 0.0 and 7.9. The majority of the route in these areas would be in a designated 
utility corridor. The amendment to the CDCA Plan discussed above would include the portion of the 
route that deviates from a designated utility corridor on BLM land in the ISDRA. 


ES-14 


Detail of Milpitas Wash SMA Segment of B-Line 



\ >1 

i " 

Utility 1 

Corridor J _- 

i 

BEI Lateral 


Blythje 


- -■ A — 

\ _ 1 


jnberg 


N( 


Calipatria 



Detail of CDCA Segment of IID Lateral 

L 




Imperial Co. 






Imperial 

Reservoir 


Figure ES-1 

North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 

Locations Requiring a BLM Plan Amendment 




ES-15 












































































The proposed pipeline facilities would not cross any national or State forests. National or 
California Wild and Scenic Rivers, registered national natural landmarks, lands designated under a 
Habitat Conservation Plan, golf courses, or areas designated under the National Trails System. However, 
the proposed route crosses 11 recreation or public interest areas and is adjacent to several others. In 
general, impacts on recreational and public interest areas would be temporary and would be limited to the 
period of active construction, which typically would last only several days to several weeks in any one 
area. 


During construction, the Project could have an impact on OHV use in the ISDRA and other areas 
by restricting access to areas designated for OHV use. Conversely, the pipeline rights-of-way could 
increase accessibility for OHV use into previously inaccessible, environmentally sensitive areas. To 
reduce the potential for interference between pipeline construction activities and authorized OHV use as 
well as unauthorized OHV use of the pipeline rights-of-way after construction, North Baja developed an 
OHV Plan that addresses the initial siting, construction, and operation of the proposed facilities. North 
Baja’s OHV Plan was developed in consultation with BLM recreation specialists and biologists in 2001 
and 2002 during planning for the original North Baja Pipeline Project and again in 2005 during planning 
for the proposed Project. The OHV Plan is also based on experience North Baja has gained while 
operating, maintaining, and managing the A-Line right-of-way since 2002. Peak OHV use in the ISDRA 
is especially high in November and December. North Baja has adjusted its construction schedule to avoid 
conflict with the high-use recreational season in the ISDRA. North Baja would also install the pipeline 
deeper in certain portions of the ISDRA to avoid conflict with recreational activities. 

North Baja has no plans to maintain a permanent road on the right-of-way for operation and 
maintenance of the pipeline facilities. However, North Baja would maintain access to all portions of the 
permanent right-of-way by four-wheel drive vehicles in order to conduct emergency and periodic 
maintenance. The level of routine maintenance required by North Baja should not increase the 
accessibility the right-of-way provides for OHV use into previously restricted, inaccessible, or 
environmentally sensitive areas. In accordance with its OHV Plan, North Baja would install blocking 
measures to further reduce the potential for OHV use of the right-of-way. North Baja would also place 
signs and vegetative barriers at various access points along the right-of-way as requested by the BLM. 
Implementation of North Baja’s OHV Plan and these measures would reduce the potential impacts 
associated with unauthorized OHV use of the right-of-way to less than significant levels. Other 
recreational activities occurring along the pipeline routes could be impacted by construction-induced 
effects such as traffic, noise, and dust. These effects may affect the quality of some users’ recreational 
experiences, but would be temporary in nature and less than significant. 

Visual impacts of the Project would be greatest at the aboveground facility sites. Modifications at 
the existing aboveground facilities would result in an incremental increase in impacts on visual resources 
but would generally be minor because of the presence of the existing facilities. North Baja would paint 
the new or additional facilities so they would blend with the surrounding landscape. Construction of 
these facilities would not result in a substantial adverse effect on a scenic area or vista, substantially 
damage scenic resources, or substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the area or its 
surroundings. North Baja’s proposed mitigation measures would reduce the visual impact of the 
aboveground facilities to less than significant levels. 

Socioeconomics 

No significant adverse socioeconomic impacts associated with the proposed Project were 
identified. The existing regional infrastructure would be able to handle the demand for housing and other 
services created by the temporary influx of construction workers. Personnel from North Baja’s existing 
staff would assume operation and maintenance of the new facilities as part of their existing routine 


ES-16 


workload. Therefore, the Project would not cause a permanent population increase in any of the affected 
counties. The Project would not increase the short- or long-term demand for utilities and public service 
systems. Construction and operation of the Project would have a minor positive effect on local tax 
revenue and economies. 

Transportation and Traffic 

The proposed pipelines would cross several linear transportation and utility rights-of-way, 
including roads and railroads. All railroads and many road crossings would be bored; therefore, there 
would be little or no disruption to traffic. Most smaller, unpaved roads and driveways would be open cut 
where permitted by local authorities or landowners. However, no roads would be closed unless adequate 
detours are provided. If a detour is required, traffic would be rerouted to another nearby road. This 
would not result in a significant change in the level of service of Project-area roadways. If no reasonable 
detour is feasible, North Baja would leave at least one lane of traffic open. Where Project construction 
crosses roads necessary for access to private residences and no alternative entrance exists, North Baja 
would implement measures (e.g., plating over the open portion of the trench) to maintain passage for 
landowners and emergency vehicles. Most open-cut crossings would be completed and the road 
resurfaced in 1 or 2 days; therefore, construction would not cause the closure of a roadway for more than 
48 hours consecutively. 

In addition, construction of the B-Line would take place within the road or road shoulder of 18th 
Avenue for about 7.6 miles and the IID Lateral would be constructed within several Imperial County 
roadways. As discussed above, North Baja has prepared Traffic Management Plans in consultation with 
Riverside and Imperial Counties to minimize disruptions to the flow of traffic along 18th Avenue and 
Imperial County roadways. Implementation of these Traffic Management Plans would reduce impacts 
associated with construction of the Project to less than significant levels. 

Construction of the Project would result in temporary increases to traffic levels due to the 
commuting of the construction workforce to the Project area as well as the movement of construction 
vehicles and delivery of equipment and materials to the construction work area. Overall, the number and 
frequency of construction vehicle trips would be low on any particular roadway at any one time because 
construction would move sequentially along the Project right-of-way and the Project would not cause an 
increase in traffic that would be substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity. Therefore, 
impacts associated with increased traffic levels during construction of the Project would be less than 
significant. 

Cultural Resources 

The FERC is responsible for complying with section 106 of the National Historic Preservation 
Act (NHPA), which requires Federal agencies to take into account the effects of their undertakings on 
historic properties and afford the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) an opportunity to 
comment. The procedures for complying with section 106 are outlined in the ACHP’s regulations (Title 
36 CFR Part 800). The effects of the Project on properties of traditional religious and cultural importance 
to Native Americans must also be considered in accordance with section 101 (d)(6) of the NHPA and the 
American Indian Religious Freedom Act. North Baja, as a non-Federal party, is assisting the FERC in 
meeting its obligations under section 106 and the implementing regulations in Title 36 CFR Part 800. In 
addition, the BLM must consider Native American religious and cultural concerns for the portion of the 
Project crossing Federal lands in accordance with the Archaeological Resource Protection Act, the Native 
American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, and Sacred Sites Executive Order 13007. 


ES-17 


The CSLC is responsible for complying with all provisions of the CEQA covering cultural 
resources, including the CEQA sections 21083.2 and 21084.1, and section 15064.5 of the Guidelines for 
Implementing the CEQA. Cultural resources include prehistoric and historic-period archaeological sites, 
districts, and objects; standing historic structures, buildings, districts, and objects; and locations of 
important historic events or sites of traditional/cultural importance. The State CEQA Guidelines section 
15064.5 indicates a project may have a significant environmental effect if it causes “substantial adverse 
change” in the significance of an historic resource as defined in section 15064.5(a)(1) through (a)(4). 
Under the CEQA, the CSLC is also required to take into account the effect on properties eligible for 
listing on the California Register of Historic Resources (CRHR) or that meet the definition of a unique 
archaeological resource in the CEQA section 21083.2. 

North Baja surveyed a 220-foot-wide corridor in 2000 and 2001 for the construction of the A- 
Line, which also covers the construction work area for the proposed B-Line. No cultural resources were 
identified in Arizona. Ninety cultural resources were identified along the B-Line route in California. 
Four cultural resources are recommended as not eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic 
Places (NRHP) and the CRHR and no further work is recommended. Forty-four cultural resources have 
not been evaluated to determine eligibility and 42 sites are recommended as eligible for listing on the 
NRHP and the CRHR, including the All-American Canal. North Baja would avoid impacts on the All- 
American Canal by use of the HDD crossing method. Impacts on the other canals and irrigation features 
would be mitigated by North Baja’s proposal to monitor construction activities. North Baja would 
mitigate impacts on the remaining unevaluated and eligible sites by the use of avoidance measures 
(including installation of exclusion fencing), construction monitors, data recovery, and/or narrowing of 
the construction right-of-way. In addition, North Baja would conduct additional surveys or evaluations at 
four cultural resources that are unevaluated or eligible for listing on the NRHP and the CRHR. 

North Baja surveyed a 100- to 200-foot-wide corridor along about 43.0 miles of the proposed IID 
Lateral route. The remainder of the proposed route was not surveyed due to denied access. North Baja 
would complete surveys along the remaining portion of the IID Lateral route when landowner permission 
is obtained. 

North Baja’s surveys identified 98 cultural resources along the IID Lateral. Five cultural 
resources are recommended as not eligible for listing on the NRHP and the CRHR and no further work is 
recommended. Two cultural resources (including the All-American Canal) are recommended as eligible 
for listing on the NRHP and the CRHR. North Baja would avoid impacts on the All-American Canal by 
use of the HDD crossing method. The remaining 91 cultural resources have not been evaluated to 
determine eligibility for listing on the NRHP and the CRHR. Two of these sites would not be within the 
construction work area. Seventy-two of the unevaluated cultural resources are canals or other irrigation 
features, 13 are transmission/telephone lines or poles, and 1 is a railroad. North Baja would mitigate 
impacts on these features by monitoring them during construction to ensure avoidance. North Baja would 
conduct additional evaluations at the three remaining unevaluated sites. 

North Baja surveyed a 110-foot-wide corridor along the BEI Lateral where it would be adjacent 
to Riviera Drive. The remaining portion of the BEI Lateral was covered by the survey of the Blythe 
Meter Station site, which included the SoCal Gas Interconnect. No cultural resources were identified 
along the BEI Lateral or at the Blythe Meter Station site. North Baja also completed surveys of the 18 th 
Avenue, Ripley, Ogilby, and IID Lateral (El Centro) Contractor Yards. No cultural resources were 
identified at these yards. North Baja has indicated it would complete surveys along any access roads that 
require improvements or modifications. 

North Baja provided its Unanticipated Discovery Plan to be used in the event that cultural 
resources or human remains are discovered during construction. The plan includes contact procedures for 


ES-18 


the FERC, the State Historic Preservation Offices (SHPOs), the BLM, the BOR, and Native American 
tribes, as appropriate. The plan provides for the protection in place of any unanticipated discoveries until 
appropriate evaluation and consultation have occurred. In the event that the discovery is determined to be 
of NRHP significance, a treatment plan (such as avoidance, monitoring, and/or scientific data recovery) 
would be developed and implemented in consultation with the appropriate parties. 

North Baja conducted initial and follow-up contacts with 18 Native American tribes whose 
traditional territories are crossed by the Project or who had been identified by the SHPOs or another 
knowledgeable party as having a potential cultural resources concern. Members of the Quechan Tribe 
and the Campo Band of Mission Indians participated in the cultural resources surveys as Native American 
monitors. 

At the time of North Baja’s follow-up consultations, the majority of the tribes indicated they had 
no concerns about the proposed Project or had not yet reviewed the Project materials. Some of these 
tribes also requested to receive future Project updates. North Baja was not able to complete follow up 
contacts with the Fort McDowell Yavapai Nation. The Gila River Indian Community and the Hualapai 
Tribe indicated they would defer comments to the Colorado River Indian Tribe. The Hualapai Tribe and 
the Torres-Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians identified concerns about existing trails in the Project area. 
North Baja would monitor construction activities to avoid impacts on trails. The Tohono O’odham 
Nation indicated it would defer comments to the Colorado River Indian Tribe and the Mojave, the 
Cocopah, and the Quechan Tribes. The Hopi Tribe stated it would defer comments to the SHPO and 
other interested parties, that it had an interest in the White Tanks area, and that no known traditional 
cultural properties were in the Project area. The Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community indicated 
it would defer comments to the Tohono O’odham Nation. The proposed Project would not affect the 
White Tanks area, which is near Phoenix. No Native American religious concerns were identified. 

No traditional cultural properties have been identified in the proposed Project’s area of potential 
effect to date. North Baja indicated it would continue consultations with Native American tribes 
throughout the Project. 

In addition to North Baja’s contacts, the Agency Staffs’ August 2005 notice regarding the Project 
was sent to 64 individuals from 33 Native American tribes that were identified by the California Native 
American Heritage Commission. One tribe, the Ramona Band of Cahuilla, provided comments in 
response to the notice. 

The Arizona SHPO indicated that previous surveys were adequate for the currently proposed 
Project in Arizona. In order to complete the process of complying with section 106 of the NHPA for the 
proposed facilities, North Baja would need to conduct cultural resources surveys along portions of the 
proposed route in California where landowner permission has not been obtained. In addition, North Baja 
would conduct further work at certain cultural resources sites to determine their eligibility for listing on 
the NRHP. Once cultural resources surveys and evaluations are complete, the FERC, in consultation with 
the SHPO(s); the BLM; the BOR; and the FWS, Cibola NWR, as applicable, would make determinations 
of eligibility and Project effects. If historic properties would be adversely affected, the FERC, as the lead 
Federal agency, would notify the ACHP to afford it an opportunity to participate in consultation. The 
CSLC would make the final determination of eligibility for the CRHR. If any historic property would be 
adversely affected. North Baja would be required to prepare treatment plans indicating how impacts 
would be reduced or mitigated. Once a treatment plan is approved, a Memorandum of Agreement would 
be executed by the appropriate parties. North Baja would implement the specific treatment measures 
before Project construction is authorized by the FERC and the CSLC in any given area. Implementation 
of treatment would occur only after certification of the proposed Project. Implementation of treatment 
would ensure that Project-related adverse effects would be resolved for purposes of section 106 
compliance, and reduced to less than significant levels for the purposes of NEPA compliance. 


ES-19 


Air Quality 


Air quality in the Project area is regulated by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality 
(ADEQ), the Mojave Desert Air Quality Management District (AQMD), and the Imperial County Air 
Pollution Control District (ICAPCD). La Paz County, Arizona is designated as attainment or 
unclassifiable for all criteria pollutants. Portions of Riverside and Imperial Counties, California that are 
within the Project area are designated as nonattainment for ozone and particulate matter having an 
aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to 10 microns and attainment for all other criteria pollutants. 
Because there would be no stationary sources or operational emissions associated with the proposed 
Project, the stationary source permitting requirements of the ADEQ, the Mojave Desert AQMD, and the 
ICAPCD do not apply. 

Fugitive dust regulations adopted by the ADEQ, the Mojave Desert AQMD, and the ICAPCD do 
apply to the construction activities associated with the proposed Project. The construction activities that 
would generate emissions include land clearing, ground excavation, and cut and fill operations. These 
construction activities would occur 6 days per week for up to 12 hours per day during the construction 
periods. The intermittent and short-term emissions generated by these activities would include dust from 
soil disruption and combustion emissions from the construction equipment. Emissions from construction 
of the pipeline and aboveground facilities are not expected to cause or significantly contribute to a 
violation of an applicable ambient air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or 
projected air quality violation because the construction equipment would be operated on an as-needed 
basis during daylight hours only and the emissions from gasoline and diesel engines would be minimized 
because the engines must be built to meet the standards for mobile sources established by the EPA mobile 
source emission regulations including those in Title 40 CFR Part 85. Most of the construction equipment 
would be powered by diesel engines and would be equipped with typical control equipment (e.g., catalytic 
converters), and Project-related vehicles and construction equipment would be required to use the new 
low sulfur diesel fuel as soon as it is commercially available. In addition, North Baja would implement 
several other measures (e.g., minimize idling time, ensure that diesel-powered construction equipment is 
properly maintained and shut off when not in use, reduce construction-related trips as feasible for workers 
and equipment) to minimize impacts on air resources. 

Fugitive dust generated by construction activities would be minimized by the implementation of 
North Baja’s Dust Control Plan. The Dust Control Plan includes control measures identified as best 
management practices by the regulating agencies. Some of these measures include applying water to 
unpaved roads and active construction areas and reducing vehicle speeds on unpaved roads. The Agency 
Staffs have recommended that North Baja revise its Dust Control Plan to provide more specific 
information regarding the precautions that would be taken to minimize fugitive dust from construction 
activities. With the implementation of North Baja’s revised Dust Control Plan, fugitive dust from Project 
construction activities is not expected to result in a violation of Federal or State ambient air quality 
standards or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation due to the transient 
and temporary nature of the construction activities. 

The odorant facility North Baja proposes to install at the existing Ogilby Meter Station to odorize 
the natural gas before delivery into the SoCal Gas system could result in a potential for offsite odor. 
North Baja has designed the facility and associated equipment to minimize the potential for odorant 
release and would frequently inspect the odorant transfer, storage, and injection systems as part of routine 
maintenance to reduce the potential for spills to occur. In addition, North Baja would prepare a site- 
specific spill response plan to be implemented in case of an odorant release. This plan would address 
anticipated spill scenarios, release response actions, personal protective equipment, spill 
neutralization/cleanup, emergency responder coordination, and public communication. The siting of the 
odorant facility at a relatively remote location, the specific design features of the facility, and North 


ES-20 


Baja’s adherence to its inspection and maintenance procedures as well as its implementation of the site- 
specific spill response plan would minimize the potential for the Project to create objectionable odors that 
would affect a substantial number of people or affecting a lesser number of people for a substantial 
duration. 

Noise 


The Project would occur primarily in rural range, desert, and agricultural areas. Noise sources in 
rural areas are predominantly natural, including insects, birds, wind, and weather. Accordingly, existing 
ambient noise levels near most of the pipeline routes are low. The majority of the pipeline and 
aboveground facilities would be located in areas with little to no human population and few noise- 
sensitive areas. The FERC guidelines do not specifically cover operational noise for the North Baja 
Pipeline Expansion Project aboveground facilities such as the odorant facility, meter stations, launchers, 
or receivers. The proposed modifications at the existing Ehrenberg Compressor Station would not 
increase operational noise levels at the station. Neither the States of Arizona nor California have 
Statewide noise regulations that would limit noise from these facilities; noise is regulated at the local level 
in both States. 

Noise would be generated during construction of the pipeline and aboveground facilities. Noise 
associated with construction activities would be both temporary and intermittent because equipment 
would be operated on an as-needed basis during daylight hours. Therefore, the potential for construction 
activities to result in the generation of or exposure of persons to excessive ground-borne vibration or 
ground-borne noise levels would be less than significant. 

Pipeline construction would proceed at rates averaging about 1 mile per day. However, 
construction activities in any one area could last from several weeks to several months on an intermittent 
basis. Construction equipment would be operated on an as-needed basis during this period. Although 
certain noise-generating activities associated with pipeline construction (e.g., HDDs and bore operations) 
would occur at a single location for extended time periods and include nighttime activities, most activities 
would occur for limited lengths of time at a specific location and would occur during daytime hours. 
Additionally, a majority of the activities would occur away from population centers; therefore, the 
potential for the Project to result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in 
the Project vicinity above levels existing without the Project would be less than significant. 

North Baja would comply with the noise elements included in the Riverside County and Imperial 
County General Plans; therefore, the potential for the Project to result in the exposure of persons to or 
generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, 
or applicable standards of other agencies would be less than significant. 

Reliability and Safety 

The pipeline and aboveground facilities associated with the North Baja Pipeline Expansion 
Project would be designed, constructed, operated, and maintained to meet or exceed the U.S. Department 
of Transportation (DOT) Minimum Federal Safety Standards in Title 49 CFR Part 192 and other 
applicable Federal and State regulations including the California Public Utilities Commission, General 
Order 112-e. These regulations, which are intended to protect the public and to prevent natural gas 
facility accidents and failures, include specifications for material selection and qualification; odorization 
of gas; minimum design requirements; and protection of the pipeline from internal, external, and 
atmospheric corrosion. To address seismic hazards, the facilities would be designed to meet or exceed the 
latest edition of the Uniform Building Code or International Building Code and to incorporate current 
seismological engineering standards, including the Guidelines for the Seismic Design of Oil and Gas 


ES-21 


Pipeline Systems (American Society of Civil Engineers 1984), Guidelines for the Design of Buried Steel 
Pipe (American Lifelines Alliance 2001), and Guidelines for the Seismic Design and Assessment of 
Natural Gas and Liquid Hydrocarbon Pipelines (Pipeline Research Council International, Inc. 2004). 

North Baja would prepare and implement an Operation and Maintenance Plan in accordance with 
the requirements in Title 49 CFR Part 192. Within the first 6 months of placing the pipeline into 
operation, North Baja would conduct an internal inspection of the pipeline. This inspection would use an 
in-line magnetic flux leakage inspection tool (i.e., smart pig). The record of this inspection would serve 
as an initial set of data that would be compared to future internal inspections so that changes in pipe 
condition, primarily pipe wall thickness loss, can be readily determined and corrected. Following the 
initial test, internal inspections with a high resolution instrument would be conducted on a periodic basis, 
at a minimum of one inspection every 10 years, or sooner if the evidence suggests that significant 
corrosion or defects exist or if any new Federal or State regulations require more frequent or comparable 
inspections. In locations designated as high consequence areas, the pipeline would be inspected every 7 
years. 


The existing pipeline system is monitored and controlled 24 hours a day for pressure drops in the 
pipeline that could indicate a leak or other operating problem through a Supervisory Control and Data 
Acquisition (SCADA) system, which is a computer system for gathering and analyzing real-time systems. 
The system is programmed to take appropriate immediate action when alarm conditions are present. The 
SCADA system allows operators located in the Gas Control Center in Portland to monitor pipeline system 
conditions, including any actions that the SCADA system has made or any conditions that require 
immediate operator actions such as shutting down a compressor unit, closing a valve, or initiating 
emergency call-out action. In addition, a crew that conducts on-site operations and maintenance is 
located at the Ehrenberg Compressor Station, and is on call 24 hours a day. When completed, the B-Line, 
BEI Lateral, and IID Lateral would be operated in conjunction with the existing system and subject to the 
same operation and maintenance procedures. 

The pipeline facilities would be clearly marked at line-of-sight intervals and at other key points to 
indicate the presence of the pipeline. The pipeline system would be routinely inspected by air and on the 
ground to observe right-of-way conditions and monitor for encroachments, third-party activities, or 
erosion on or near the right-of-way. All inspections would be conducted in accordance with DOT 
standards. Erosion or unstable conditions would be repaired as appropriate and appurtenant facilities 
would be maintained on a regular basis. 

While the primary focus of these standards is prevention of accidents, North Baja would prepare 
an Emergency Response Plan that would be coordinated and tested (through drills and exercises) with 
local fire/police departments and emergency management agencies. 

Cumulative Impacts 

When the impacts of the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project are considered additively with 
the impacts of other past, present, or reasonably foreseeable future projects, there is some potential for 
cumulative effect on resources such as soils, vegetation and wildlife (including special status species), 
land use, recreation, aesthetic resources, socioeconomics, transportation and traffic, cultural resources, air 
quality, and noise. For the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project, mitigation has been developed or 
recommended to minimize, avoid, or compensate for adverse impacts on each of these resources. 
Consequently, the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project would not contribute significantly to a 
cumulative adverse effect on the region’s environment. 


ES-22 


As discussed above, the North Baja system is the U.S. portion of the international North 
Baja/Gasoducto Bajanorte Pipeline Project. The Gasoducto Bajanorte pipeline, which currently takes gas 
from the North Baja system at the U.S.-Mexico border and moves it west, would be reconfigured to move 
gas in the opposite direction, similar to the reconfiguration of the North Baja system that would occur 
during Phase I. Transport of the initial volumes of LNG-source gas would also require a new compressor 
station (Algodones Compressor Station) on the Gasoducto Bajanorte pipeline. This compressor station 
would be located 2.5 miles south of the Califomia-Mexico border and 3 miles west of the Arizona- 
Mexico border, in Baja California del Norte just southwest of the border town of Algodones. The 
reconfiguration of the Gasoducto Bajanorte pipeline and the construction of the Algodones Compressor 
Station are planned for completion in late 2007. 

The capacity of the Gasoducto Bajanorte pipeline system would similarly be expanded in 
coordination with North Baja’s Phase II expansion. To accommodate the additional volume of gas, up to 
100 percent looping of the Gasoducto Bajanorte pipeline and additional compression would be required, 
both at the Algodones Compressor Station and at a new compressor station near Mexicali (Mexicali 
Compressor Station). These facilities would be constructed in 2009 to be operational by 2010. 

Because of the proximity of the proposed compressor stations in Mexico, the potential exists for 
operating emissions to affect air quality in the United States, specifically in the Imperial Valley portion of 
Imperial County. The Agency Staffs conducted an analysis of the operating emissions from the Mexicali 
and Algodones Compressor Stations and determined that no emitted pollutants at these compressor station 
sites would result in a predicted concentration above an established significant impact level at the 
maximally impacted receptor located in the vicinity of the U.S.-Mexico border. Therefore, it is unlikely 
that emissions from these proposed stations would result in any significant cumulative ambient air quality 
impacts at receptors in the vicinity of or across the U.S. border. The emissions from existing power 
plants west of Mexicali (the La Rosita Power Complex [LRPC] and the Termoelectrica de Mexicali 
Power Plant [TDM Plant]) were taken into consideration in the cumulative impacts analysis. 

A Health Risk Assessment was conducted to determine the potential impacts of the toxic air 
pollutants emitted by the existing power plants and proposed compressor stations. The analysis also 
included the LRPC and TDM Plant. Based on the analysis, the average cancer risks as well as the chronic 
and acute hazard indexes would be well below the established significance thresholds used by California 
air districts. In addition, the future chronic and acute hazard indexes would also be well below the more 
stringent thresholds set by the South Coast AQMD. Therefore, the cumulative risks associated with the 
emissions from the existing power plants and the future compressor stations would be considered less 
than significant. 

Growth-inducing Impacts 

North Baja does not anticipate adding permanent staff to handle Project operations. The potential 
growth-inducing impact of the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project would be the delivery of an 
alternative or additional source of natural gas to existing natural gas users. Providing an alternate fuel 
supply could lead to a positive economic environment conducive to growth or prevent increases in energy 
costs that might restrict growth. The existing power plants that would be supplied by the North Baja 
Pipeline Expansion Project (i.e., the Blythe Energy Facility I and the IID El Centro Generating Station) 
would not be solely dependent on the gas supplied by the Project. Potential infrastructure growth might 
occur with or without the construction of the pipeline and thus would not be attributable to the proposed 
Project. However, to the extent that the HD’s Unit 3 Repower Project, which is a proposed expansion at 
the El Centro Generating Station, would diversify its suppliers of natural gas, the additional gas supplied 
by the proposed Project could be a growth-inducing impact. 


ES-23 


Environmental Justice 


Some communities within the Potential Impact Radius 6 of the Project have low-income and 
minority populations compared to the affected counties as a whole. However, none of the potential 
impacts of the Project that could affect environmental justice issues are considered significant. Therefore, 
the Project would neither result in a disproportionately high and adverse effect or impact on minority or 
low-income populations nor contribute to a cumulative impact on these populations. 

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 

The No Project Alternative was considered. The Agency Staffs concluded that while the No 
Project Alternative would eliminate the environmental impacts identified in this EIS/EIR, North Baja 
would not be able to provide transportation for LNG-source natural gas from the Mexican pipeline system 
into the United States to meet the demand for natural gas in California and other southwestern U.S. 
markets. This means customers in the southwestern United States would likely have fewer and 
potentially more expensive options for obtaining natural gas supplies in the near future. This might lead 
to alternative proposals to develop natural gas delivery or storage infrastructure, reduced use of natural 
gas, and/or the use of other sources of energy. 

It is possible that the infrastructure currently supplying natural gas to the proposed market area 
could be developed in other ways unforeseen at this point. This might include constructing or expanding 
regional pipelines as well as LNG import and storage systems. Any construction or expansion work 
would result in specific environmental impacts that could be less than, similar to, or greater than those 
associated with the proposed Project. Increased costs could potentially result in customers conserving or 
reducing use of natural gas. Although it is possible that additional conservation may have some effect on 
the demand for natural gas, the level of conservation efforts, as described in the CEC’s 2005 Integrated 
Energy Policy Report (CEC 2005a), is not expected to significantly reduce the long-term requirements for 
natural gas or effectively exert downward pressures on gas prices. 

Denying North Baja’s applications could force potential natural gas customers to seek regulatory 
approval to use other forms of energy. California regulators are promoting renewable energy programs to 
help reduce the demand for fossil fuels. While renewable energy programs can contribute as an energy 
source for electricity, they cannot at this time reliably replace the need for natural gas or provide 
sufficient energy to keep pace with demand. 

Alternatives involving the use of other existing or proposed LNG or natural gas facilities to meet 
the stated objectives of the proposed Project were evaluated. None of these system alternatives could 
meet the Project objectives within the time frame of the proposed Project. Furthermore, each of the 
system alternatives could result in its own set of significant environmental impacts that could be greater 
than those associated with the proposed Project. 

The B-Line deviates from a designated utility corridor on BLM land at five locations in the 
CDCA. As part of the EIS/EIR for the A-Line, the alternative of following designated utility corridors 
was considered. Based on the analysis conducted for that project, the route selected for the A-Line, 
including the deviations from designated utility corridors and the crossing of the Milpitas Wash SMA, 
was determined to be environmentally preferable to a route that remained within designated utility 
corridors. The proposed B-Line would be adjacent to the existing A-Line for the entire route. The 
collocation of facilities is generally preferred by land management agencies, land use planners, and other 
regulatory agencies and has several inherent engineering and environmental advantages. Perhaps the 


6 The potential impact radius is calculated as the product of 0.69 and the square root of the maximum allowable operating pressure of the 
pipeline in pounds per square inch multiplied by the pipeline diameter in inches. 


ES-24 



most important of these advantages is that new land disturbance is minimized. Because of the advantages 
of collocation, and because the route selected for the A-Line that would be followed for the B-Line was 
previously determined to be environmentally preferable to a route that remains within a designated utility 
corridor, alternatives for the B-Line route that would follow designated utility corridors were not 
considered. The Agency Staffs evaluated one route alternative (22 nd Avenue Alternative) in comparison 
with the corresponding segment of the proposed B-Line. The 22 nd Avenue Alternative would avoid 18 th 
Avenue. The 22 nd Avenue Alternative was eliminated because it would merely transfer impacts from one 
or more property owners or communities to another without conferring obvious environmental 
advantages. 

Seven route alternatives were evaluated in comparison with the corresponding segment of the 
proposed IID Lateral. Along the IID Lateral, North Baja proposes to deviate from a designated utility 
corridor at three locations within the CDCA. Two alternatives (Corridor L and Bonds Comer 
Alternatives) were evaluated to stay within a designated utility corridor for a longer distance than the 
proposed route. Four alternatives (CalTrans, ISDRA North, ISDRA Transmission Line, and ISDRA 
Grays Well Road Alternatives) were identified to avoid potential conflicts of the IID Lateral with existing 
and planned recreational use in the ISDRA. One alternative (Gasoducto Bajanorte Pipeline Route 
Alternative) would connect directly from the Gasoducto Bajanorte pipeline west of Mexicali to the HD’s 
El Centro Generating Station. All of the IID Lateral alternatives were eliminated because they would not 
be environmentally preferable to the corresponding segment of the IID Lateral, would be infeasible, or 
would not meet the Project objectives. 

Four route variations (East Mesa Route Variation and Imperial Valley Route Variations A, B, and 
C) in comparison with the corresponding segment of the proposed IID Lateral were evaluated to avoid 
potential conflicts with other projects or address scoping comments. These route variations were 
eliminated because they would not be environmentally preferable to the corresponding segment of the IED 
Lateral, would be infeasible, or would merely transfer impacts from one or more property owners or 
communities to another without conferring obvious environmental advantages. 

An alternative to the proposed delivery points to the SoCal Gas system and Blythe Energy 
Facility I supply pipeline along Riviera Drive was considered. This alternative, the Arrowhead 
Alternative, would deliver natural gas to the SoCal Gas system at SoCal Gas’ existing Blythe Compressor 
Station at the intersection of 14 th Avenue and Arrowhead Boulevard in Riverside County. This alternative 
would add 2.1 miles of 36-inch-diameter pipeline; a new meter station; a pig launcher and receiver; and 
ancillary taps, piping, and aboveground facilities. The Arrowhead Alternative would eliminate the 
proposed Blythe Meter Station at Riviera Drive, the SoCal Gas Interconnect at the Blythe Meter Station, 
the 0.6-mile-long BEI Lateral, and the odorant facility at the Ogilby Meter Station. The Arrowhead 
Alternative would modify a small portion of the proposed Project by essentially exchanging certain 
aboveground facilities and short segments of pipeline. Because North Baja’s negotiations with SoCal Gas 
regarding the delivery point to its system are still in progress, the Agency Staffs consider the Arrowhead 
Alternative to be a reasonable alternative and have analyzed it in the applicable resource discussions in 
Section 4. 

The Agency Staffs evaluated the alternatives of installing the odorant facility at the proposed 
Blythe Meter Station site or constructing the facility on a new site at a different location. Construction of 
the odorant facility on the proposed Blythe Meter Station site would require an expansion of that site and 
would place the facility in a residential area. Construction of the odorant facility at a different location 
would require disturbance of previously undisturbed land and the construction of additional pipeline 
facilities to connect it to the proposed pipeline. The alternatives of creating a new industrial site or 
installing the odorant facility in a residential area on an expanded Blythe Meter Station site would not be 
environmentally preferable to the proposed Project and were eliminated from further consideration. 


ES-25 


ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE 


The State CEQA Guidelines (section 15126.6(d)) require that an EIR include sufficient 
information about each alternative to allow meaningful evaluation, analysis, and comparison with the 
proposed Project. An analysis of the Arrowhead Alternative and the No Project Alternative in 
comparison with the proposed Project is included in the major resource topics in Section 4. A 
comparison of the impacts of the proposed Project, the No Project Alternative, and the Arrowhead 
Alternative is included in Section 5. Based on the analysis in this EIS/EIR, the No Project Alternative 
would eliminate the environmental impacts associated with the proposed Project and, therefore, is the 
environmentally superior alternative. However, as discussed above, under the No Project Alternative 
North Baja would not be able to provide transportation for LNG-source natural gas from the Mexican 
pipeline system into the United States to meet the growing demand for natural gas in California and other 
southwestern U.S. markets. 

Section 15126.6(e)(2) of the State CEQA Guidelines provides, in part, “If the environmentally 
superior alternative is the “No Project Alternative,” the EIR shall also identify an environmentally 
superior alternative among the other alternatives.” The Arrowhead Alternative would modify only a 
small portion of the proposed Project essentially by exchanging certain facilities; therefore, it is 
considered an alternative segment of the proposed Project rather than an alternative to the overall Project. 
Because the draft EIS/EIR identifies only the “No Project Alternative” as an alternative to the proposed 
Project, there is no obligation to identify an environmentally superior alternative as provided in section 
15126.6(e)(2). 

MAJOR CONCLUSIONS 

The Agency Staffs have concluded that if the Project is constructed in accordance with applicable 
laws and regulations, North Baja’s proposed mitigation, and the Agency Staffs’ additional mitigation 
recommendations, it would be an environmentally acceptable action. Although many factors were 
considered in this determination, the principal reasons are: 

• 99 percent of the proposed pipeline facilities would be constructed in or adjacent to 
various existing rights-of-way; 

• no new permanent right-of-way would be required for the B-line, and the permanent 
right-of-way for the IID Lateral would be limited to a maximum width of 30 feet; 

• North Baja would implement its CM&R Plan, SPCC Plan, HDD Plan, Traffic 
Management Plans, Blasting Specifications, PRMM Plan, Dust Control Plan, Fire 
Prevention and Suppression Plan, Site-specific Residential Construction Mitigation Plans, 
OHV Plan, and Unanticipated Discovery Plan for Cultural Resources to protect natural 
resources and residential areas during construction and operation of the Project; 

• use of the HDD method would avoid disturbances to the beds and banks of the Colorado 
River, the All-American Canal, and the East Highline Canal and associated 
wetlands/riparian areas; 

• the appropriate consultations with the FWS, the CDFG, the SHPOs, and Native American 
tribes, and any appropriate compliance actions resulting from these consultations, would 
be completed before North Baja would be allowed to begin construction in any given 
area; and 


ES-26 


• an environmental inspection and mitigation monitoring program would ensure 
compliance with all mitigation measures that become conditions of certification or 
approval. 

The FERC and CSLC staffs are responsible for identifying any significant environmental impacts 
so they can be considered by their respective Commissions in deciding whether to approve the Project. 
As part of the analysis, specific mitigation measures were developed to reduce the environmental impact 
that would result from construction of the Project. With three exceptions, North Baja’s proposed and/or 
the Agency Staffs’ recommended mitigation would reduce potential environmental impacts to less than 
significant levels. The Agency Staffs have determined that the Project is likely to adversely affect the 
Peirson’s milk-vetch and the desert tortoise and its designated critical habitat. The Agency Staffs also 
believe that impacts on the flat-tailed homed lizard and its habitat would be considered significant. As 
such, impacts on these three species would be considered significant. Approval of the Project would be 
subject to a Statement of Overriding Considerations under the CEQA due to these significant unavoidable 
impacts that could remain after all available or feasible mitigation is applied. 

The FERC and CSLC staffs will recommend that all mitigation measures in this EIS/EIR be 
attached as conditions to any Certificate issued by the FERC and to any approval issued by the CSLC. 
The BLM will present, in its Records of Decision for the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project, its own 
recommendations that incorporate the concurrence or non-concurrence of the BOR and the FWS. The 
FERC, the CSLC, and the BLM would ensure compliance with the mitigation measures included in this 
EIS/EIR through the adoption of an environmental inspection and mitigation monitoring program for the 
Project. 


ES-27 



























































































INTRODUCTION 














1.0 INTRODUCTION 


On February 7, 2006, North Baja Pipeline, LLC (North Baja), an indirect wholly owned 
subsidiary of TransCanada Pipelines Ltd., filed an application with the Federal Energy Regulatory 
Commission (Commission or FERC) under sections 7 and 3 of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) and Parts 157, 
184, and 153 of the Commission’s regulations. The application was assigned Docket Nos. CP06-61-000 
and CP01-23-003 and was noticed in the Federal Register on March 1, 2006. North Baja is seeking a 
Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity (Certificate) from the FERC to construct, own, and 
operate an expansion of its existing interstate natural gas pipeline system. North Baja is also seeking 
FERC authorization for an amendment to its Presidential Permit to allow construction of additional 
facilities at the U.S.-Mexico border and the importation of vaporized liquefied natural gas (LNG). North 
Baja’s application to the California State Lands Commission (CSLC) for an amendment to its existing 
right-of-way lease across California’s Sovereign and School Lands was received on May 17, 2005. 

North Baja’s proposal, referred to as the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project (Project or 
proposed Project), would involve the construction and operation of 79.8 miles of 42-inch- and 48-inch- 
diameter pipeline loop 1 adjacent to North Baja’s existing 30-inch- and 36-inch-diameter pipeline; a 45.7- 
mile-long, 16-inch-diameter lateral; 2 a 0.6-mile-long, 10-inch-diameter lateral; less than 0.1 mile of 36- 
inch-diameter interconnect pipeline; a new odorant facility; two new meter stations; modifications at 
North Baja’s existing compressor and meter stations; and installation of new mainline and lateral valves 
and pig 3 launchers and receivers. The existing North Baja system is currently certificated by the FERC to 
transport 512,500 dekatherms per day (Dthd) of natural gas in a southbound direction. Once completed, 
the expanded system would be capable of transporting up to 2,932,000 Dthd (2,753 million standard 
cubic feet per day [MMscfd]) of natural gas in a northbound direction. 

A total of 65.3 miles of the proposed pipeline would be on lands managed by the Bureau of Land 
Management (BLM) under the jurisdiction of the Palm Springs-South Coast, El Centro, and Yuma Field 
Offices. Because the proposed route deviates from a designated utility corridor on BLM land in several 
locations and would cross the Milpitas Wash Special Management Area (SMA), the BLM would need to 
amend two resource management plans: the California Desert Conservation Area Plan (CDCA Plan) (as 
amended) and the Yuma District Resource Management Plan (Yuma District Plan). The environmental 
staffs of the FERC, the CSLC, and the BLM (Agency Staffs) have prepared this draft environmental 
impact statement/environmental impact report and draft land use plan amendment (draft EIS/EIR) to 
assess the environmental impacts associated with the construction and operation of the facilities proposed 
by North Baja in accordance with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 
and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). 

North Baja proposes a phased construction schedule beginning in 2007 and ending in 2009. The 
proposed Project facilities and schedule are described in detail in Section 2.0. 

1.1 PROJECT OBJECTIVES, PURPOSE, AND NEED 

The North Baja system is the U.S. portion of the international North Baja/Gasoducto Bajanorte 
Pipeline Project. North Baja’s existing system extends approximately 79.8 miles from an interconnection 
with the facilities of El Paso Natural Gas Company (El Paso) near Ehrenberg, Arizona through southeast 


1 A loop is a segment of pipeline that is usually installed adjacent to an existing pipeline and connected to it at both ends. The loop allows 
more gas to be moved through the system. 

2 A lateral pipeline typically takes gas from the main system to deliver it to a customer, local distribution system, or another interstate 
transmission system. 

1 A pig is an internal tool that can be used to clean and dry a pipeline and/or to inspect it for damage or corrosion. 


1-1 




California to a point on the international border between Yuma, Arizona and Mexicali, North Baja 
Mexico, where the pipeline interconnects with the Gasoducto Bajanorte pipeline. 

The North Baja/Gasoducto Bajanorte Pipeline Project was built in 2002 to supply domestic 
natural gas from the United States primarily to gas-fired electric generation facilities in Baja California, 
Mexico. Since that time, several projects have been initiated to build LNG storage and vaporization 
terminals on the Baja California coast, near the terminus of the Gasoducto Bajanorte pipeline. LNG is 
natural gas that has been cooled to a temperature of about -260 degrees Fahrenheit (°F) so that it becomes 
a liquid. Because LNG is more compact than the gaseous equivalent, it can be transported long distances 
across oceans using specially designed ships. The terminals in Baja California would receive LNG 
imported from southern and western countries including Russia (the Sakhalin Project), Australia (the 
Gorgon Project, among others), and Indonesia (the Tangguh Project). 

The first of these terminals, Sempra LNG’s (Sempra) Energia Costa Azul (ECA) terminal, is 
already under construction with an anticipated commercial in-service date of early 2008. Sempra has 
announced its intention to expand the ECA terminal to double its base and peak load capacity and held a 
non-binding open season between April 17 and May 12, 2006 to solicit commercial interest in additional 
LNG processing capacity. Although the open season was non-binding, the results indicated high shipper 
interest in additional processing capacity. Sempra has announced that it will begin working with the 
shippers that submitted bids to develop binding terminal agreements. Pending regulatory approvals and 
successful commercial negotiations, the expansion could become operational as early as 2010. 

In addition, Chevron Corporation (Chevron) is developing the Terminal GNL Mar Adentro de 
Baja California (Mar Adentro). The Mar Adentro terminal received project approval from the Secretaria 
de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales in 2004 and authorization from the Communication and 
Transport Secretariat in January 2005. In January 2005, several U.S. and Mexican environmental groups 
filed a challenge to the Mar Adentro terminal authorizations under the North American Free Trade 
Agreement (NAFTA). Under NAFTA rules, the environmental commission can hold hearings on 
disputed issues surrounding the project but it cannot stop the project. Front end engineering and design 
work on the terminal commenced in March 2004 and is continuing. A final investment decision is 
expected in 2006 followed by a timetable on the first receipt of LNG. The Mar Adentro terminal could 
become operational in early 2010. 

The North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project is designed to transport natural gas from these LNG 
terminal projects in Baja California to California and Arizona. In addition to the new volumes from the 
LNG terminals. North Baja would continue to offer southbound gas transportation service for several 
existing shippers via backhaul. 4 More specifically, the objectives of the proposed Project are to: 

• modify the North Baja pipeline system to allow natural gas entering the continent at 
planned LNG terminals in Baja California to flow into California and Arizona; 

• expand the current capacity of the North Baja pipeline system to transport up to 
2,932,000 Dthd (2,753 MMscfd) of natural gas from the ECA terminal, the expanded 
ECA terminal, and the Mar Adentro terminal to U.S. delivery points; 


4 The American Gas Association defines a backhaul as a transaction that results in the transportation of gas in a direction opposite of the 
aggregate physical flow of gas in the pipeline. This is typically achieved when the transporting pipeline redelivers gas at a point(s) upstream 
from the point(s) of receipt. A backhaul condition will exist as long as the aggregate backhaul transactions total less than the aggregate 
forward haul transactions. An example of how this could occur on North Baja’s expanded system is if a southbound shipper desires to 
deliver domestic gas to the I1D Lateral. The gas would be delivered to the interconnection with the North Baja system and the IID Lateral 
and received at the existing interconnection between North Baja and El Paso. The actual physical flow direction of the gas would be 
northbound. Physically, molecules of LNG would be delivered at the HD Lateral while the domestic molecules would be delivered to 
customer(s) at the interconnections at the northern end of the North Baja system or other pipelines. 


1-2 



expand the system in a phased manner that would allow flexibility for the capacity to 
become available when market needs warrant; 




• interconnect with the gas transmission systems of Southern California Gas Company 
(SoCal Gas) at Blythe, California and El Paso at Ehrenberg, Arizona, which would allow 
LNG-source gas to be delivered to various users within southern California and other 
customers in the Southwest, and to provide adequate delivery pressures into those 
systems; 

• deliver up to 120,000 Dthd (113 MMscfd) of LNG-source gas to the existing Blythe 
Energy Facility I supply pipeline, which feeds the Blythe Energy Facility I gas-fired 
power plant west of Blythe near Interstate Highway 10. The Blythe Energy Facility I 
currently receives its natural gas from El Paso. The volumes delivered by the North Baja 
system would be used in power generation and would provide supply and supplier 
diversification for the Blythe Energy Facility I; and 

• provide the Imperial Irrigation District (IID) access to LNG-source gas and to the 
interstate natural gas pipeline network by delivering up to 110,000 Dthd (103 MMscfd) 
of LNG-source gas to a delivery point at HD’s existing El Centro Generating Station in 
El Centro, California. The El Centro Generating Station currently receives its natural gas 
from SoCal Gas. The volumes delivered by the North Baja system would be used to 
serve the existing electric generating load at the station and would provide supply and 
supplier diversification for the IID. As stated above, North Baja would continue to offer 
southbound transportation via backhaul. This arrangement would enhance the HD’s 
current access to domestic supplies and provide greater flexibility and reliability for the 
IID. 

According to North Baja, access to natural gas from the southern and western Pacific Rim 
countries would provide an entirely new source of natural gas supply and allow gas consumers in the 
Southwest (including California) to replace North American reserves. This new supply would benefit 
American consumers by increasing gas-on-gas competition and putting downward pressure on prices. 
Any action that can reduce prices will have a significant impact on the total amount spent by consumers, 
because the California gas market is the second largest in the United States. 

In 2003, Californians consumed about 2.2 trillion cubic feet of gas. In-State production of natural 
gas satisfies only about 13 percent of Statewide demand (California Energy Commission [CEC] 2005b). 
The remaining natural gas that is consumed in the State comes primarily from five major out-of-State 
production basins: the Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin (Alberta, Canada), the Rocky Mountain 
Basin (Utah, Wyoming, and Colorado), the San Juan Basin (New Mexico), the Anadarko Basin 
(Oklahoma and Texas), and the Permian Basin (Texas). 

The demand for natural gas in California, as in the rest of the United States, is expanding. Recent 
projections estimate that the use of natural gas in California will increase at a rate of 0.7 percent per year 
to about 2.4 trillion cubic feet of natural gas in 2013 (CEC 2005a). According to the CEC, although 
increases in efficiency and use of renewable energy sources are expected to moderate future demand, they 
are offset by population and business growth. Gas producers across North America are struggling to keep 
pace with the growing demand and while the number of natural gas wells drilled in the United States and 
Canada is at an all-time high, conventional production from most of the mature supply basins in North 
America has declined or only increased modestly since 1990 (CEC 2005a). The amount of gas produced 
per well is also declining, and each well is being drained faster (CEC 2005a). The result is that domestic 


1-3 


natural gas production is expected to remain almost the same over the next decade and will not keep up 
with the growth in demand. 

The projected shortfall in North American production relative to demand in California is expected 
to be compounded by two factors: California’s position at the western end of the American and Canadian 
pipeline network, which exposes it to supply/demand imbalances that occur in other regions of the United 
States, and the growth in natural gas demand in Canada and Mexico. 

California’s supply of natural gas is affected by rising demand for natural gas in neighboring 
states. Forty-three new power plants totaling more than 8,000 megawatts have come online in Arizona 
since 2001 (CEC 2005a). These plants are intermediate load and peaking power plants, which often ramp 
up quickly to meet changing electricity demand. According to the CEC, this may take more natural gas 
from the pipeline faster than expected. Under normal circumstances, this practice is not troublesome if 
the pipeline can be balanced by taking gas out of storage. In the Phoenix area, however, the nearest 
storage is hundreds of miles away, and it is becoming increasingly common for pipeline pressure to drop 
during periods of high demand. If the gas pressure gets low enough, it could cause curtailments that 
could affect natural gas delivery into California (CEC 2005a). 

California’s supply of natural gas could also be affected by the demands for natural gas in Canada 
and Mexico, which are projected to grow at an annual rate of 1.3 and 2.9 percent, respectively (CEC 
2005a). Although the CEC estimates that domestic and Canadian sources could fulfill projected 
California natural gas demand through 2013, as Canada and Mexico increasingly turn to natural gas to 
satisfy their own growing demand for electricity, traditional drilling and exploratory activities are not 
going to be sufficient to meet both their own domestic needs and their export requirements to the United 
States. For these reasons, the CEC has strongly recommended that the State pursue other measures to 
secure supplies (Marks 2004). 

Given the demand for natural gas and the need to reduce potential supply interruptions, the CEC 
has identified the need for California to develop new natural gas infrastructure to gain access to a 
diversity of fuel supply sources and to remove constraints on the delivery of natural gas. In addition to 
efficiency programs and use of renewable power sources, the CEC has identified LNG receiving 
terminals on the Pacific Coast as a potential future cost-competitive and reliable source (CEC 2005a), 
enabling California gas markets to obtain supplies from producing basins throughout the Pacific and 
Indian Oceans (e.g., Indonesia, Australia, Russia, South America, and Alaska). Moreover, the CEC has 
said that the cost to deliver natural gas to the West Coast via an LNG project could be well below the 
market prices that California pays at its borders. Thus, a potential new supply source close to or in 
California could have a major effect on the market prices for natural gas in California (CEC 2005a). 
However, actual prices to consumers will depend upon contracts signed between suppliers and consumers 
or their representatives. 

The anticipated delivery points for the proposed Project are: the El Centro Generating Station in 
El Centro, California (via the proposed 45.7-mile-long lateral [IID Lateral]); the Blythe Energy Facility I 
supply pipeline and the SoCal Gas system in Blythe, California; and the El Paso system in Ehrenberg, 
Arizona. These interconnections would provide markets in California and the Southwest with access to 
LNG-source gas, either physically or through displacement. For example, a portion of the LNG-source 
gas shipped on the North Baja system is expected to displace gas currently being supplied by other 
pipeline systems from other sources. Specifically, some of the deliveries to the SoCal Gas system would 
displace deliveries currently received from the El Paso system. The displaced gas could be delivered by 
El Paso to Arizona, while the LNG-source gas delivered to SoCal Gas would be delivered to customers 
throughout southern California, including Imperial County. North Baja states that no modifications 
would be required on the SoCal Gas system to receive gas from the North Baja Pipeline Expansion 


1-4 


Project and that the El Paso pipelines appear to have the necessary capacity without the need to construct 
additional pipeline facilities. 

The proposed Project would be constructed in three phases as follows: 

• Phase I would involve modifications at North Baja’s existing Ehrenberg Compressor 
Station and Ogilby Meter Station to allow for natural gas flow from south to north, 
construction of an odorant facility at the existing Ogilby Meter Station to odorize the 
natural gas before delivery into the SoCal Gas system, modifications at the existing El 
Paso Meter Station at the Ehrenberg Compressor Station site to allow LNG-source gas to 
be delivered into the El Paso system, construction of a new meter station (Blythe Meter 
Station) and short pipeline interconnect (SoCal Gas Interconnect) with SoCal Gas’ 
system, and a 0.6-mile-long pipeline lateral (Blythe Energy Interconnect Lateral [BEI 
Lateral]) between the Blythe Meter Station and the Blythe Energy Facility I’s existing 
supply pipeline. 

• Phase I-A would involve the construction of the 45.7-mile-long IID Lateral between the 
North Baja system and the existing IID El Centro Generating Station in El Centro. 

• Phase II would involve the construction of 79.8 miles of pipeline loop (B-Line) adjacent 
to North Baja’s existing system between Blythe and the U.S.-Mexico border. 

Once the Phase I, Phase I-A, and Phase II expansions are completed, the total northbound 
capacity of the North Baja system would be 2,932,000 Dthd (2,753 MMscfd). 

North Baja currently has executed precedent agreements^ for firm natural gas transportation 
service for most of the total proposed capacity of its expanded system. The average contract term is 20 
years. North Baja anticipates that shippers awarded capacity in the ECA terminal expansion would 
acquire the remaining capacity. Table 1.1-1 lists North Baja’s shippers by phase, the contracted volumes, 
and the delivery path. In addition to the new expansion shippers, several of North Baja’s existing 
shippers have elected to reverse the direction of their existing southbound capacity to northbound 
capacity. The initial volumes that these shippers have elected for northbound flow is 302,000 Dthd 
(283.57 MMscfd) in 2007. In 2010, this volume is reduced to 272,000 Dthd (255.40 MMscfd). 

The precedent agreements between North Baja and all of the shippers require that the gas 
delivered to the North Baja system meet the most stringent gas quality standard of any of the pipelines to 
which the North Baja system might ultimately deliver the gas. The precedent agreements also state that 
North Baja would file with the FERC to modify its gas quality standards to be consistent with the most 
stringent standards of any directly interconnecting downstream pipeline. These requirements mean that 
either the gas delivered to the Baja California terminals will meet the most stringent gas quality standard, 
or the terminal will have to process the gas before delivering it to the pipelines to meet this standard. 


A precedent agreement is a binding contract under which one or both parties has the ability to terminate the agreement if certain conditions, 
such as receipt of regulatory approvals, are not met. 


1-5 




TABLE 1.1-1 


North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project Precedent Agreements 

Phase/Shipper 

Quantity (Dthd) 
Annual 

Delivery Path 

Phase 1 Northbound 



Coral Energy Resources, LP 

212,000 

U.S.-Mexico border to SoCal Gas 

Sempra Energy LNG Marketing Corp. 

100,000 

U.S.-Mexico border to SoCal Gas 

Existing Shippers a 

302.000 

U.S.-Mexico border to SoCal Gas 

Total Phase 1 Northbound 

614,000 


Phase 1 BEI Lateral 



FPL Energy, LLC 

120,000 

Blythe Meter Station to Blythe Energy Facility 1 Supply 
Pipeline 

Phase l-A IID Lateral 



Imperial Irrigation District 

110,000 

Ogilby Meter Station to El Centro Generating Station 

Phase II Northbound 



Chevron USA, Inc. 

1,070,000 

U.S.-Mexico border to SoCal Gas 

Coral Energy Resources, LP 

530,000 

U.S.-Mexico border to SoCal Gas 

Sempra Energy LNG Marketing Corp. 

200.000 

U.S.-Mexico border to SoCal Gas 

Total Phase II Northbound 

1,800,000 


Total Northbound Phases (2010) 

2,384,000 b 


Unsuscribed Northbound Capacity 

548,000 


Several existing shippers reversed the primary path from southbound to northbound for a total 302,000 Dthd (283.57 
MMscfd). In 2010, this volume is reduced to 272,000 Dthd (255.40 MMscfd). 
b Reflects the reduction in Phase 1 volumes described in footnote a. 

Note: All precedent agreement terms are for 20 years. 



1.2 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF THIS EIS/EIR 

The principal purposes for preparing an EIS/EIR and proposed land use plan amendment are to: 

• identify and assess the potential direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts on the natural 
and human environment that would result from the implementation of the proposed 
Project; 

• describe and evaluate reasonable alternatives to the proposed Project that would avoid or 
substantially lessen any significant adverse effects of the Project on the environment; 

• identify and recommend specific mitigation measures, as necessary, to avoid or minimize 
significant environmental effects; and 

• encourage and facilitate involvement by the public and interested agencies in the 
environmental review process. 

The topics addressed in this EIS/EIR include alternatives, geology (including hazards and mineral 
and paleontological resources); soils; groundwater; surface waters (including water quality); wetlands; 
vegetation; wildlife and aquatic resources; special status species (including federally and State-listed 
threatened and endangered species); land use (including agricultural resources); special management 
areas; recreation and public interest areas; aesthetic resources; socioeconomics (including population, 
housing, and utilities and public service systems); transportation; cultural resources; air quality; noise; 


1-6 








reliability and safety; cumulative impacts; growth-inducing impacts; and environmental justice. The 
EIS/EIR describes the affected environment as it currently exists, discusses the environmental 
consequences of the proposed Project, and compares the Project’s potential impact to that of a reasonable 
range of alternatives as discussed in Section 3. The EIS/EIR also presents recommended mitigation 
measures. 

The FERC and the CSLC are the lead agencies for the preparation of this EIS/EIR. The BLM 
and the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) are Federal cooperating agencies. A cooperating agency has 
jurisdiction by law or special expertise with respect to environmental impacts involved with the proposal 
and is involved in the NEPA analysis. The roles of the FERC, the CSLC, the BLM, and the BOR in the 
Project review process are described below. Several other agencies (i.e., the U.S. Army Corps of 
Engineers [COE], the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service [FWS], and the California Department of Fish and 
Game [CDFG]) were asked to participate in the environmental review process as cooperating agencies but 
declined to be formal cooperating agencies. These agencies and several other agencies participated in the 
process by providing scoping comments or additional information. The agency and public participation 
process for the proposed Project is discussed in Section 1.3. The major Federal, State, and local permits, 
approvals, and consultations for the Project are discussed in Section 1.6. 

1.2.1 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 

The FERC is the Federal agency responsible for evaluating applications filed for authorization to 
construct and operate interstate natural gas pipeline facilities. As such, the FERC is the lead Federal 
agency for the preparation of this EIS in compliance with the requirements of NEPA, the Council on 
Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations for implementing the procedural provisions of NEPA (Title 40 
Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] Parts 1500-1508), and the FERC’s regulations implementing NEPA 
(Title 18 CFR Part 380). 

As the lead Federal agency for the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project, the FERC is required 
to comply with section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) and section 106 of the National 
Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). Both of these statutes have been taken into account in the preparation 
of this EIS/EIR. The FERC will use the document to consider the environmental impacts that could result 
if it issues North Baja a Certificate and a Presidential Permit amendment under sections 7 and 3, 
respectively, of the NGA. 

The FERC will also consider non-environmental issues in its review of North Baja’s application. 
Authorization will be granted only if the FERC finds that the evidence produced on financing, rates, 
market demand, gas supply, existing facilities and service, environmental impacts, long-term feasibility, 
and other issues demonstrates that a project is required by the public convenience and necessity. 
Environmental impact assessment and mitigation development are important factors in the overall public 
interest determination. 

The FERC may issue a Preliminary Determination on Non-Environmental Issues (PD) for a 
project before completing its review of the project’s environmental aspects. Consistent with the Policy 
Statement issued by the FERC in September 1999, 6 the PD typically considers such issues as the need for 
a project and its economic effect on existing customers of the Applicant, on other pipelines in the area, 
and on landowners and communities. For example, the Commission considers the extent to which the 


6 On September 15, 1999, the FERC issued a Policy Statement that established criteria for determining whether there is a need for a proposed 
project and whether the proposed project would serve the public interest. The Policy Statement explains that in deciding whether to 
authorize the construction of major new pipeline facilities, the FERC balances the public benefits against the potential adverse consequences. 
In evaluating new pipeline construction, the FERC’s goal is to give appropriate consideration to the enhancement of competitive 
transportation alternatives, the possibility of overbuilding, subsidization by existing customers, the Applicant’s responsibility for 
unsubscribed capacity, the avoidance of unnecessary disruptions of the environment, and the unneeded exercise of eminent domain. 


1-7 



Applicant may need to exercise eminent domain to obtain a right-of-way for a proposed project and 
balances that against the benefits to be provided by the project. The issuance of a PD does not prejudice 
any further actions by the Commission. Final action regarding issuance of a Certificate would not occur 
until after the environmental review is completed, all environmental issues have been appropriately 
addressed, and a final Order is issued by the Commission. The issuance of a PD also does not prejudice 
actions by other jurisdictional agencies. 

1.2.2 California State Lands Commission 

The CSLC is the State agency that has jurisdiction and management control over California’s 
Sovereign and School Lands. 7 As such, the CSLC has the principal responsibility for carrying out and 
approving the Project in California, and is thus the lead agency in California for preparing the EIS/EIR, 
complying with the CEQA (Public Resources Code section 21000 et seq.), following the guidelines for 
the implementation of the CEQA (California Code of Regulations Title 14, section 15000 et seq.), and 
coordinating the review of the EIS/EIR by State and local responsible and trustee agencies (see Section 
1.2.4). 


The CSLC will use the document to consider North Baja’s application to amend its existing right- 
of-way lease across the State’s Sovereign and School Lands in conjunction with the environmental 
impacts that could result from any part of the Project in California. When the EIS/EIR is completed, the 
CSLC must certify that: 

• the final EIS/EIR has been completed in compliance with the CEQA; 

• the final EIS/EIR was presented to the CSLC in a public meeting, and the CSLC 
reviewed and considered the information contained in the final EIS/EIR prior to 
considering the proposed Project; and 

• the final EIS/EIR reflects the CSLC’s independent judgment and analysis (State CEQA 
Guidelines section 15090[a]). 

In conjunction with its consideration of North Baja’s application, the CSLC must prepare one or 
more written findings of fact for each significant environmental impact identified in the document. These 
findings must either state that: 

• the Project has been changed (including adoption of mitigation measures) to avoid or 
substantially reduce the magnitude of the impact; 

• changes to the Project are within another agency’s jurisdiction and have been or should 
be adopted; or 

• specific considerations make mitigation measures or alternatives infeasible. 

If any of the impacts identified in the EIS/EIR cannot be reduced to a level that is less than 
significant, the CSLC may issue a Statement of Overriding Considerations for approval of the Project if 
specific social, economic, or other factors justify a project’s unavoidable adverse environmental effects. 
If the CSLC decides to approve North Baja’s application to amend its lease for crossing California’s 
Sovereign and School Lands, it will subsequently file a Notice of Determination. 


7 Generally, Sovereign Lands include all ungranted tidelands and submerged lands, beds of navigable rivers, streams, sloughs, lakes, bays, 
estuaries, inlets, and straits. School Lands are what remain of the nearly 5.5 million acres throughout the state originally granted to California 
by Congress in March of 1853 to benefit public education. 


1-8 



1.2.3 Bureau of Land Management and Bureau of Reclamation 

The BLM and the BOR are Federal land management agencies affected by North Baja’s proposal. 
Because these agencies must comply with the requirements of NEPA before granting or amending rights- 
of-way across lands under their management, these agencies have elected to act as cooperating agencies 
in preparing this EIS/EIR. 

The BLM will use the EIS/EIR to meet its NEPA responsibilities in considering North Baja’s 
application to amend its existing Right-of-Way Grant and obtain a Temporary Use Permit for the portion 
of the Project on Federal lands. The BLM will also use the EIS/EIR to consider amending the CDCA 
Plan (as amended), which would be necessary for any pipeline construction outside of designated utility 
corridors, as well as amending the Yuma District Plan, which would be necessary for pipeline 
construction across the Milpitas Wash SMA. The BLM would adopt the EIS/EIR per Title 40 CFR Part 

1506.3 if, after an independent review of the document, it concludes that its comments and suggestions 
have been satisfied. 

Under section 185(f) of the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920, the BLM has the authority to issue 
Right-of-Way Grants for all affected Federal lands. This would be in accordance with Title 43 CFR Parts 
2800 and 2880, subsequent 2800 and 2880 Manuals, and Handbook 2801-1. For the North Baja Pipeline 
Expansion Project, the BLM would consider the issuance of an amended Right-of-Way Grant and the 
issuance of associated Temporary Use Permits that would apply to all BLM-managed and BOR- 
administered lands. The BLM would also issue the Right-of-Way Grant and Temporary Use Permits for 
the crossing of the Cibola National Wildlife Refuge (NWR), which is managed by the FWS. The BLM 
would consider conformance with land use plans and impacts on resources and programs to determine 
whether to issue an amended Right-of-Way Grant. 

The BOR and the FWS would issue letters to the BLM that would concur or not concur with 
issuance of an amended Right-of-Way Grant across its lands. The BLM would consider the concurrence 
or non-concurrence of the BOR and the FWS, as well as FERC approval or denial, in making its decision 
whether to amend the Right-of-Way Grant. The BLM’s decision would be documented in a Record of 
Decision (ROD). If the BLM decides to approve the Project, it would issue an amended Right-of-Way 
Grant and a Notice to Proceed that would allow construction on Federal lands. The Right-of-Way Grant 
would include standard and site-specific stipulations of the BLM, the BOR, and the FWS; conditions 
imposed on the Project as the result of the NEPA and the CEQA review; and a complete Plan of 
Development. Details of land ownership are presented in Sections 2.2 and 4.8.2. Consistency with land 
management plans is discussed in Section 1.5. 

1.2.4 Responsible and Trustee Agencies 

Under the CEQA, the CSLC is responsible for providing the EIS/EIR to the California State 
Clearinghouse for it to coordinate the review of the document with State and local responsible and trustee 
agencies. A responsible agency is an agency other than the lead agency that also has a legal responsibility 
for carrying out or approving a project. A responsible agency must actively participate in the lead 
agency’s CEQA review process, review the EIS/EIR, and use the document when making a decision on 
the Project. A trustee agency has jurisdiction over certain resources held in trust for the people of 
California. Responsible and trustee agencies for the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project include the 
CDFG; the California Department of Transportation (CalTrans); the California Regional Water Quality 
Control Board, Colorado River Basin Region (CRWQCB); the Mojave Desert Air Quality Management 
District (AQMD); and the Imperial County Air Pollution Control District (ICAPCD). 


1-9 


1.3 PUBLIC REVIEW AND COMMENT 


On May 19, 2005, North Baja filed a request with the FERC to implement the Commission’s Pre- 
Filing Process for the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project. At that time, North Baja was in the 
preliminary design stage of the Project and no formal application had been filed with the FERC. On June 
2, 2005, the FERC granted North Baja’s request and established a pre-filing docket number (PF05-14- 
GOO) to place information related to the Project into the public record. The purpose of the Pre-Filing 
Process is to encourage the early involvement of interested stakeholders, facilitate interagency 
cooperation, and identify and resolve issues before an application is filed with the FERC. The CSLC, the 
BLM, and the BOR agreed to conduct their environmental reviews of the Project in conjunction with the 
Commission’s Pre-Filing Process. 

As part of the Pre-Filing Process, North Baja mailed notification letters to landowners, 
government and agency officials, and the general public informing them about the Project and inviting 
them to attend open houses on July 6 and 7, 2005 to learn about the Project and to ask questions and 
express their concerns. Notifications of the open houses were also published in local newspapers. The 
open houses were held in Blythe, El Centro, and Calexico, California. The Agency Staffs attended the 
open houses to explain the NEPA/CEQA environmental review process to interested stakeholders and 
take comments about the Project. The questions and concerns raised by the public at the open houses are 
addressed in this EIS/EIR as indicated in Table 1.3-1. 

Additional contacts North Baja has had with landowners regarding the proposed Project include 
establishing a single point of contact within North Baja to answer questions and provide information, 
distributing direct mailings, posting information in local newspapers and at local libraries, and sending 
notification to all landowners that its Certificate application was filed with the FERC. 

In June 2005, the FERC mailed out a Notice of Pre-Filing Process Review for the North Baja 
Pipeline Expansion Project (Notice of Pre-Filing Process Review) that briefly described the Project, the 
Pre-Filing Process, and the agencies involved. The notice also announced the dates and locations of 
North Baja’s open houses; invited comments from the public; and provided information on how to obtain 
additional information about the Project. The notice was sent to Federal, State, and local agencies; 
elected officials; environmental and public interest groups; Native American tribes; affected landowners; 
local libraries and newspapers; and other stakeholders in the region who had indicated an interest in the 
Project. 


On August 30, 2005, the Agency Staffs issued a Notice of Intent/Preparation to Prepare an 
Environmental Impact Statement/Report and Proposed Land Use Plan Amendment for the Proposed 
North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project, Request for Comments on Environmental Issues/Impacts, and 
Notice of Public Scoping Meetings (NOI/NOP). The NOI/NOP was published in the Federal Register and 
briefly described the Project, announced that the BLM would be using the EIS/EIR to consider an 
amendment to the CDCA Plan and the Yuma District Plan, and described the EIS/EIR process and the 
BLM’s plan amendment process. The NOI/NOP also provided a preliminary list of EIS/EIR 
issues/impacts identified by the Agency Staffs, invited written comments on the environmental 
issues/impacts to be addressed in the EIS/EIR, listed the date and location of two public scoping meetings 
to be held in the Project area, and established a closing date for receipt of comments of October 10, 2005. 
The Agency Staffs mailed the NOI/NOP to the same parties that were sent the Notice of Pre-Filing 
Process Review. In accordance with the CEQA, all parties in California were sent the NOI/NOP via 
certified mail. Seventeen written comment letters or e-mails were received. 


1-10 


TABLE 1.3-1 


Issues/Impacts Identified and Comments Received During the Public Scoping Process 
for the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 

EIS/EIR Section 

Issue/Summary of Comment Addressing Comment 

GENERAL/PROJECT DESCRIPTION 


Explanation of the Project’s purpose and need, discussion of the term “precedent agreement,” description 
of the potential sources of imported gas, recipients of the gas delivered by the Imperial Irrigation District 
(IID) Lateral 

Route and schedule for the IID Lateral 
Communication with landowners 

Consideration of Mexican facilities as connected actions; applicability of Executive Order 12114, 
Environmental Effects Abroad of Major Federal Actions, to the proposed action 

Evaluation of the feasibility of locating the loop closer to the existing pipeline than the proposed 25-foot 
offset 

Coordination with the U.S. Border Patrol, evaluation of the potential for open trenches to be used for illegal 
activities 

Hydrostatic testing procedures 
Post-construction monitoring 
Pipeline abandonment procedures 

Number of pipelines within the Bureau of Land Management right-of-way 
Evaluation of alternatives 
Evaluation of mitigation measures 

ALTERNATIVES 

Consideration of an alternative route along the Arizona side of the Colorado River 

Consideration of alternative routes for the IID Lateral; alternatives to avoid the need to revise the 
management plans for the California Desert Conservation Area and the Milpitas Wash Special 
Management Area; routing through the Imperial Sand Dunes Recreation Area (ISDRA), including use of a 
designated utility corridor 

Locate the proposed Mexican compressor station in the United States; locate the IID El Centro Power 
Generating Station on the old Brock Research facility property 

GEOLOGY 

Description of seismic studies 

Evaluation of mitigation to prevent a pipeline rupture due to seismic events 

SOILS 

Description of compaction levels considering the high water table and clay soils 
Installation of culverts where dry washes cross Stallard Road 

WATER QUALITY/AQUATIC RESOURCES/WETLANDS 

Description of required U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) permits, coordination with the COE, potential 
requirement for a Streambed Alteration Agreement with the California Department of Fish and Game 

Description (including acreage and channel lengths, habitat types, values, and functions) and maps of all 
waters of the United States within the Project area 

Description of impaired waters in the Project area and mitigation measures to avoid further degradation of 
impaired waters 

Impacts on the East Highline Canal 

Evaluation of discharges to waters of the United States, description of measures to minimize or mitigate 
proposed discharges, evaluation of discharges as the least environmentally damaging alternative 

VEGETATION 

Reduction of impacts on productive agricultural lands 

Evaluation of restoration methods for microphyll woodlands; post-construction restoration efforts; 
concentrate mitigation efforts in microphyll woodlands; conduct maintenance beyond the right-of-way in 
microphyll woodlands; protection of trees; impact on native vegetation; lack of revegetation from the 
previous project; plans for invasive plant management; use of native plants for restoration 

Consideration of exotics removal from areas of mesquite; seed mixes; noxious weed concerns 


1.1 

1.1, 2.4, 4.8.4.3, 
Appendix B 

1.3, 4.2.4, 4.5.3, 4.9.5 

1.4 

2 . 2.1 

2.3.1 

2.3.1.4.3.3.4 

2.5, 4.5.3, Appendix E 
2.7 

2.0, Appendix B 

3.0 

4.0 

3.2.3.1 

3.2.3.2 


3.2.5 


4.1, Appendix J 
4.1.4, Appendix J 


4.2.3 

4.2.4 

4.3.3.2, 4.3.3.5, 4.4.2 

4.3.2, 4.4, Appendix B 
4.3.2 

4.3.3.3 

4.3.3.4, 4.4.3 

4.2.4, 4.5.3 

4.5.3 


4.5.5 


1-11 




TABLE 1.3-1 (cont’d) 


Issues/Impacts Identified and Comments Received During the Public Scoping Process 
for the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 

EIS/EIR Section 

Issue/Summary of Comment Addressing Comment 

WILDLIFE 


Evaluation of impact on birds protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act 

SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES 

Identification of all petitioned and listed threatened and endangered species and critical habitat, inclusion of 
the Biological Assessment in the draft environmental impact statement/environmental impact report 

Mitigation required only for new impacts; evaluation of crossing of desert tortoise critical habitat and mitigation 
measures; use of adaptive responses to field issues 

Status of and impacts on the flat-tailed horned lizard; implementation of the Flat-tailed Horned Lizard 
Rangewide Management Strategy and other mitigation measures 

Impacts on Peirson's milk-vetch 

Evaluation of mitigation measures, including buffer zones, for burrowing owls 

LAND USE 

Consistency with Federal, State, tribal, and local land use plans, policies, and controls; compatibility with the 
management plan for the Cibola National Wildlife Refuge; need for an Environmental Assessment 

Crossings of Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) withdrawn lands in the Palo Verde area, concurrence of the BOR 
for crossings of BOR-withdrawn land, clarification of land ownership for the IID Lateral 

Location of the A-Line and distance from another existing pipeline; space restriction within county easement; 
allowable distance from residences; discussion of compensation and easement issues; workspace 
requirements associated with the A-Line’s crossing of the Colorado River; indemnification for agricultural 
damages 

Effect of the pipeline right-of-way on the development of private property and public access to the riverfront 
Potential effect on a future border fence 

Evaluation of location, impacts on facilities, sand movement, and designated open areas in association with 
the IID Lateral; timing of construction of the IID Lateral to avoid potential conflicts with recreational users; 
depth of cover in the ISDRA 

Potential for increased off-highway vehicle use, including that caused by tamarisk removal; installation of 
fencing as a mitigation measure; adherence to the Right-of-Way Agreement for Metropolitan Water District 
fee-owned property 

Evaluation of visual impacts 

Impacts of hazardous waste from construction and operation; evaluation of storage, disposal, and 
management plans; applicability of Federal and State requirements 

SOCIOECONOMICS/TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION 

Impact of new right-of-way on public roads and a bridge to Riviera Drive and the Riviera subdivision; effect on 
residences and school bus routes; notification of landowners 

Effect of new right-of-way on public utilities (i.e., water and sewer lines) and schools 

Impacts of open-cut road crossings; U.S. Border Patrol access requirements; consideration of repairs to the 
road membrane and the potential for future settling 

Impact on rental revenue 

CULTURAL RESOURCES 

Potential effect of the IID Lateral on the historical Plank Road Area of Critical Environmental Concern 

Potential of the B-Line to adversely affect the integrity of the buried cultural strata at Site CA-IMP-791 l/H; 
potential effects on the All-American Canal and the Coachella Canal; discussion of survey methodology 

Evaluation and treatment of prehistoric sites on BOR lands along the All-American Canal 

Impact on Native American cultural artifacts; use of a Native American monitor and a certified archaeologist; 
implementation of mitigation; effect on the traditional use area of the Cahuilla People and Native American 
sites; description of consultation between the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and tribal governments 

Discussion of Executive Order 13007, including avoidance of adverse effects on the physical integrity of 
sacred sites; cooperating agency status in regards to consultation with section 106 of the National Historic 
Preservation Act 


4.6.2.3 

4.7.2 

4.7.4.3 

4.7.4.4 

4.7.4.6 
4.7.6.3 

1.5, 2.2 

4.8.2 
4.8.2 


4.8.2, 4.8.5 

4.8.3.2 

4.8.4.3 

4.8.5 


4.8.7 

4.2.3, 4.3.2.2, 4.3.3.2, 

4.5.3, 4.6.3.2, 4.8.6 

4.8.3, 4.10.2 

4.9.4 

4.10.2, 4.10.3 

4.9.5 

4.8.5, 4.10.3 
4.11.3 

4.11.3, 4.11.6 

4.11.5 


4.11.6 


AIR QUALITY 


Evaluation of construction and operation emissions for facilities associated with the IID Lateral, specifically the 1.4, 4.12.4 

IID El Centro Generating Station, as well as mitigation measures to control and minimize emissions 


1-12 




TABLE 1.3-1 (cont’d) 


Issues/Impacts Identified and Comments Received During the Public Scoping Process 
for the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 

EIS/EIR Section 

Issue/Summary of Comment Addressing Comment 

Discussion of baseline conditions and impact of the additional supply of natural gas on Imperial County’s air 4.12.2, 4.12.4 
quality 

Coordination with State and local air pollution control districts in evaluating permitting requirements 4.12.3 

Applicability of Clean Air Act section 176 and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s general conformity 4.12.3 
regulations at 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Parts 51 and 93 and conformance with an approved 
State Implementation Plan 


Identification of air quality impacts related to the proposed modifications at the Ogilby Meter Station 


4.12.3, 4.12.4 


Evaluation of gas quality and the potential for large nitrogen oxides (NO*) increases due to high British thermal 4.12.4 
units liquefied natural gas (LNG), evaluation of the adequacy of U.S. standards and the Wobbe Index to 
protect air quality, comparison of U.S. and Mexican gas quality standards 

Evaluation of mitigation measures to control emissions during construction and operation 4.12.4 

Evaluation of particulate matter having an aerodynamic diameter of 10 microns or less (PM 10 ) emissions 4.12.4 

associated with fugitive dust emissions 

Consideration of associated and/or connected equipment in Mexico 4.15.6 


RELIABILITY AND SAFETY 


Depth of cover, including in the ISDRA 2.3.2, 4.2.4, 4.8.4.3, 

4.14.2 

Public safety concerns 4.14 

Potential for the aboveground portions of cathodic protection systems to be targets for vandalism 4.14.2 

Identification of Federal, county, and Mexican emergency response procedures to be implemented if a seismic 4.14.2 
event ruptures the pipeline 

Conformance with Occupational Safety and Health Act, Subpart P, 29 CFR 1926.650, .651, and .652 during 4.14.2 
trenching and excavation; monitoring requirements during field activities; consistency with the standards of the 
California Public Utilities Commission, General Order 112-E (CPUC GO 112-E) 

CUMULATIVE IMPACTS 

Evaluation of transport of criteria pollutants from any new heavy industrial, commercial, and economic 1.4 

development projects resulting from the construction of the B-Line 

Requirement to include a comprehensive evaluation and disclosure of environmental impacts from the Project 1.4 
and all connected actions on both sides of the U.S.-Mexico border 

Evaluation of potential conflicts between the IID Lateral, the All-American Canal Relining Project, and the 4.8.3.2 

BOR's canal and reservoir construction projects, including the Drop 2 Project 

Evaluation of standards applicable to the construction of additional power plants and other industry south of 4.12.4 
the U.S.-Mexico border resulting from additional gas supplies and the impact on Imperial Valley's airshed 

Include the specifics (size, rating, expected emissions, etc.) of the proposed compressor station to be built 4.15.8 
south of Algodones, Mexico, evaluate its NO* emissions 

Secure offsets in Imperial County for excess emissions from the Sempra and Intergen and any new facilities, 4.15.8 
install BACT emission controls on new facilities utilizing gas supplied from the proposed Project 

Identification of the Federal and State air quality mitigation and offsets for future long-term health risks 4.15.8 

proposed for Imperial County and Mexicali residents 

Identification of air impacts resulting from the total number of power plants and future development projects 4.15.8 
that could be constructed within the Southeast Desert Air Basin (SEDAB) and evaluation of the potential long¬ 
term air quality deterioration and possible human health impacts 

Evaluation of PM 10 emissions due to fugitive dust emissions generated by vehicles traveling on both Mexican 4.15.8 
and Imperial Valley unpaved roads 

Requirement for a cumulative health risk assessment of potential toxic emissions, identification of offsets 4.15.8 

GROWTH-INDUCING IMPACTS 

Description of the reasonably foreseeable future land use and associated impacts that would result from the 4.16 


additional power supply provided by the IID Lateral, including an estimate of the amount of growth, its likely 
location, and the biological and environmental resources at risk 

ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE 

Evaluation of environmental justice populations within the Project area, the potential for disproportionate 
adverse impacts on minority and low-income populations, and the approaches used to foster public 
participation by these populations 


1-13 




The two public scoping meetings were held to provide an opportunity for agencies and the 
general public to learn more about the proposed Project and participate in the environmental analysis by 
commenting on the issues/impacts to be addressed in the EIS/EIR. The first meeting was held in Blythe, 
California on September 28, 2005; the second meeting was in El Centro, California on September 29, 
2005. These meetings were announced in the NOI/NOP and in five local newspapers. The newspaper 
notifications were placed in both English and Spanish. Two people commented at the meeting in Blythe 
and six people, including a representative from the ICAPCD, commented at the meeting in El Centro. 
The proceedings of each meeting were recorded, and the transcripts were placed into the public record for 
the Project. 

On September 27, 28, and 29, 2005, the FERC and CSLC staff conducted interagency scoping 
meetings in the Project area to solicit comments and concerns about the Project from other jurisdictional 
agencies. Agencies present at the meetings were the FWS, Carlsbad Office; the FWS, Cibola NWR; the 
BLM; and the BOR. 

On March 10, 2006, the FERC and the CSLC sent a letter and a copy of the August 30, 2005 
NOI/NOP to potentially affected landowners on 18 th Avenue in Riverside County that inadvertently had 
not been included on the environmental mailing list for the NOI/NOP. The purpose of the letter was to 
provide these landowners an opportunity to participate in the environmental review process. The letter 
solicited comments about the proposed Project from the potentially affected landowners and established a 
closing date for receipt of comments of April 10, 2006. In accordance with the CEQA, these parties were 
sent the letter and NOI/NOP via certified mail. No comments were received. 

The transcripts of the public scoping meetings, a summary of the interagency scoping meetings, 
and all written scoping comments are part of the public record for the North Baja Pipeline Expansion 
Project and are available for viewing on the FERC Internet website (http://www.ferc.gov). The most 
frequently raised issues were related to impacts on air quality in Imperial County as a result of the 
existing and proposed upstream facilities in Mexico and the cumulative impact of the proposed Project 
when considered in association with past, present, and future projects or activities. Other issues of 
concern included impacts on special status species and native vegetation and the development of 
mitigation measures to minimize and compensate for these impacts. Comments relating to safety, 
protection of surface waters, cultural resources, alternatives, and the effects of the Project on off-highway 
vehicle (OHV) use were also received. As previously stated, Table 1.3-1 lists the environmental 
issues/impacts that were identified during the scoping process described above and indicates the section 
of the EIS/EIR in which each issue/impact is addressed. Additional issues/impacts independently 
identified by the Agency Staffs are also addressed in the EIS/EIR. 

This draft EIS/EIR was filed with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA); submitted to 
the California State Clearinghouse; and mailed to Federal, State, and local government agencies; elected 
officials; Native American tribes; affected landowners; local libraries and newspapers; intervenors 9 in the 
FERC’s proceeding; and other interested parties (i.e., miscellaneous individuals who provided scoping 
comments or asked to be on the mailing list). The distribution list for the draft EIS/EIR is in Appendix A. 
A formal notice indicating that the draft EIS/EIR was available for review and comment was published in 
the Federal Register and posted in the appropriate County Clerks’ offices in California. The typical 
NEPA/CEQA comment period for a draft EIS/EIR is 45 days. However, because the draft EIS/EIR is 
also a BLM draft land use plan amendment, the public has 90 days after the date of publication in the 


* Using the “eLibrary” link, select “General Search” from the eLibrary menu and enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the 
“Docket Number” field (i.e., PF05-14 and CP06-61). Be sure to select an appropriate date range. 

Intervenors are official parties to the proceeding and have the right to receive copies of case-related Commission documents and filings by 
other intervenors. Likewise, each intervenor must provide 14 copies of its filings to the Secretary of the Commission and must send a copy 
of its filings to all other intervenors. Only intervenors have the right to seek rehearing of the Commission’s decision. 


1-14 



Federal Register to review and comment on the draft EIS/EIR both in the form of written comments and 
at two public meetings to be held in the Project area. All comments received on the draft EIS/EIR related 
to environmental issues will be addressed in the final EIS/EIR. 

1.4 NON JURISDICTIONAL FACILITIES 

1.4.1 Background 

Under section 7 of the NGA, the FERC is required to consider, as part of its decision to certificate 
interstate natural gas facilities, all factors bearing on the public convenience and necessity. The facilities 
for the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project that would be under the FERC’s jurisdiction include 
modifications at the existing compressor and meter stations; approximately 126.1 miles of new pipeline 
loop and laterals; a new odorant facility; two new meter stations; and new valves and pig launchers and 
receivers. The proposed facilities are described in detail in Section 2.1. 

Occasionally, proposed projects have associated facilities that do not come under the jurisdiction 
of the FERC. These “nonjurisdictional” facilities may be integral to the need for the proposed Project 
(e.g., a new or expanded power plant at the end of a pipeline that is not under the jurisdiction of the 
FERC) or they may be merely associated as a minor, non-integral component of the jurisdictional 
facilities that would be constructed and operated as a result of the proposed facilities. 

The nonjurisdictional facilities associated with the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project include 
the upstream facilities in Mexico associated with bringing the LNG-source gas to the North Baja system. 
Among these are the ECA and Mar Adentro LNG terminal projects in Baja California del Norte and the 
Gasoducto Bajanorte pipeline in Baja California. 

As discussed in Section 1.1, Sempra’s ECA terminal is currently under construction and an 
expansion is being planned that would, at a minimum, double the LNG processing capacity. Chevron’s 
Mar Adentro terminal has received project authorizations and is continuing front end engineering and 
design work. Although the Mar Adentro terminal authorizations are being challenged by U.S. and 
Mexican environmental groups under NAFTA, these challenges cannot stop the project. The LNG from 
these terminals would be vaporized and then transported on Sempra’s existing Gasoducto Bajanorte 
pipeline. 

The Gasoducto Bajanorte pipeline, which currently takes gas from the North Baja system at the 
U.S.-Mexico border and moves it west, would be reconfigured to move gas in the opposite direction, 
similar to the reconfiguration of the North Baja system that would occur during Phase I. Transport of the 
initial volumes of LNG-source gas would also require a new compressor station (Algodones Compressor 
Station) on the Gasoducto Bajanorte pipeline. This compressor station would be located 2.5 miles south 
of the California-Mexico border and 3 miles west of the Arizona-Mexico border, in Baja California del 
Norte just southwest of the border town of Algodones. All of the permits have been obtained for the 
reconfiguration of the Gasoducto Bajanorte pipeline and for the construction of the Algodones 
Compressor Station, which are planned for completion in late 2007. 

The capacity of the Gasoducto Bajanorte pipeline system would similarly be expanded in 
coordination with North Baja’s Phase II expansion to transport the volumes that would originate from the 
ECA terminal expansion and/or the planned Mar Adentro terminal. Up to 100 percent looping of the 
Gasoducto Bajanorte pipeline and additional compression would be required, both at the Algodones 
Compressor Station and at a new compressor station near Mexicali (Mexicali Compressor Station). These 
facilities would be constructed in 2009 to be operational by 2010. These facilities are shown on Figure 
1.4-1. 


1-15 



cn 

CD 


*-* CJ 
o CO 
<D LL 

'O C 

Jr 03 

Q_ O 

X 
CD 


c 

o 


CO 

T- C £ 

■ « § 

^ g- ff 

^ LU to 
| _C 3 

O) a) "g 

H .9*03 

E 

co 52 
‘(o’ to 
ro >> 

1X1 CO 

4-* CO 

o 

Z m 

sz 

XL 

o 


« 


V) 

CD 


IX) 

csi 


o 


Z 


*o 



CD 

.9 o 
a> 

.9- 2 
Q- a 

CD c 
ro .2 


co in 

£ S 
i 8- 

Z UJ 


1-16 
















































































In addition to the upstream Mexican facilities, an expansion proposed by IID at the El Centro 
Generating Station to serve the growing electrical load demands of the region could be considered a 
Project-related nonjurisdictional facility. The IID is proposing to replace an existing boiler with a low 
nitrogen oxides (NO x ) combustion turbine generator and heat recovery steam generator to supply steam to 
the existing Unit 3 steam turbine generator. The expansion is referred to as the Unit 3 Repower. The 
Unit 3 Repower would increase the existing Unit 3 generating capacity from 44 megawatts to 128 
megawatts (an increase of 84 megawatts). The Unit 3 Repower would interconnect with the existing 
SoCal Gas meter station located on the generating station property. 

The Unit 3 Repower would be under the jurisdiction of the CEC, which is responsible for 
reviewing all thermal electric power plants 50 megawatts or greater proposed for construction in 
California. The CEC’s Small Power Plant Exemption (SPPE) process allows projects between 50 and 
100 megawatts an exemption from the licensing process if the CEC finds that the project would not create 
a substantial adverse impact on the environment or energy resources. The CEC is the lead agency under 
the CEQA and will prepare an Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Unit 3 Repower 
that examines public health and safety and environmental impacts of the project, including all related 
facilities such as electric transmission lines, and natural gas and water pipelines. 

On May 19, 2006, the IID filed an application for an SPPE for the Unit 3 Repower with the CEC. 
To complete the Initial Study, the CEC has prepared a data request to the IID, which has 30 days to 
provide a response. The CEC will then conduct a public workshop and hearing in El Centro to determine 
whether the exemption request should be approved. The typical time frame for the CEC to complete the 
process and issue a decision is 135 days from receipt of the application for an SPPE. The IID would then 
need to apply for the various appropriate licenses and permits from local, State, and Federal agencies. 
According to the CEC, a final decision on the Unit 3 Repower would likely be made in the fourth quarter 
of 2006 (Dyas 2006). The IID has stated that it expects the Unit 3 Repower to be in-service no later than 
2009. 


A scoping comment was received suggesting that an expansion of the Blythe Energy facilities in 
Blythe, California could be considered to be related to the proposed Project. There is no indication in the 
public record that an expansion of the Blythe Energy Facility I, which would take gas from the proposed 
Project, has been proposed. Blythe Energy LLC submitted an Application for Certification to the CEC 
for the Blythe Energy Project Phase II on February 19, 2002. This date was before the North Baja A-Line 
was constructed. The CEC approved the application in December of 2005, which was before North Baja 
filed its application for the B-Line in February 2006. Because the application for the Blythe Energy 
Project Phase II was submitted and approved before North Baja’s application for the B-Line was filed, the 
Agency Staffs do not consider the Blythe Energy Project Phase II to be a Project-related nonjurisdictional 
facility. 


The FERC has adopted a four-factor procedure to determine the appropriate scope of its 
environmental review when Project-related nonjurisdictional facilities are involved. These factors are: 

• whether the regulated activity comprises “merely a link” in a corridor-type project (e.g., a 
transportation or utility transmission project); 

• whether there are aspects of the nonjurisdictional facility in the immediate vicinity of the 
regulated activity that affect the location and configuration of the regulated activity; 

• the extent to which the entire Project will be within the FERC’s jurisdiction; and 

• the extent of cumulative Federal control and responsibility. 


1-17 


Under the CEQA, a lead agency (in this case the CSLC) may not divide a larger project into 
pieces (i.e., piecemeal or segment a project). This rule arises from the definition of project in CEQA 
section 21065, which includes the phrase “whole of the activity.” Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines 
section 15165, the CSLC must ensure that the EIS/EER meets the following standards: 

• where individual projects are, or a phased project is, to be undertaken and where the total 
undertaking comprises a project with significant environmental effect, the lead agency 
shall prepare a single program document for the ultimate project as described in State 
CEQA Guidelines section 15168; 

• where an individual project is a necessary precedent for action on a larger project, or 
commits the lead agency to a larger project, with significant environmental effect, the 
document must address the scope of the larger project; and 

• where one project is one of several similar projects of a public agency, but is not deemed 
a part of a larger undertaking or a larger project, the agency may prepare one document 
for all projects, or one for each project, but shall in either case comment upon the 
cumulative effect. 

For example, activities related to a proposed project must be included in a single CEQA 
document: (1) when they are reasonably foreseeable consequences of the project; (2) when the activity is 
a future expansion of the proposed project and will be significant because it will likely change the scope, 
nature, and impacts of the project; (3) when the proposed project cannot proceed without essential public 
services that would be provided by the related activity; or (4) when the proposed project and related 
activity are integral parts of the same project. 

1.4.2 Conclusions 

After applying the FERC’s four-factor procedure to the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 
and reviewing the Project for consistency with the CEQA, the Agency Staffs have concluded: 

• The North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project is more than a mere link in a larger corridor- 
type project. 

• The location of the LNG terminals in Baja California and planned facilities on the 
Gasoducto Bajanorte pipeline does not affect the location of the proposed looping on the 
North Baja system or the location of the IID Lateral. The locations of North Baja’s 
proposed expansion facilities and laterals are affected by the location of the existing 
pipeline facilities and the proposed delivery points. 

• The FERC’s control and responsibility is not sufficient to extend its environmental 
review to include the associated upstream facilities. 

• The associated upstream facilities are subject to the sovereign jurisdiction of another 
nation and there is no jurisdictional basis for the FERC, the CSLC, the BLM, or the BOR 
to approve, mitigate, or reject such facilities. 

• The environmental review for the IID’s Unit 3 Repower is already being conducted by 
the CEC and it would be duplicative to conduct an environmental review of the IID’s 
project in this EIS/EIR. In addition, the CEC’s determination to prepare an Initial Study 
and Mitigated Negative Declaration indicates that the HD’s Unit 3 Repower Project, as 


1-18 


proposed or modified, would not have a significant effect on the environment (see section 
15070, State CEQA Guidelines). 

In summary, the Agency Staffs have concluded that they have no jurisdiction over the associated 
upstream facilities to require their environmental analysis in connection with the analysis of the North 
Baja Pipeline Expansion Project. These upstream facilities are subject to the Mexican environmental 
regulatory review process and standards. However, in response to scoping comments, the air quality 
impacts on the United States from the associated upstream facilities are addressed in the cumulative 
impact analysis in Section 4.15 of this EIS/EIR. The impacts of the expansion at the El Centro 
Generating Station as well as the impacts of other projects in the proposed Project area that are not 
considered Project-related nonjurisdictional facilities (e.g., the Blythe Energy Project Phase II) are also 
addressed in the cumulative impact analysis in Section 4.15 of this EIS/EIR. 

During the scoping process, the EPA commented that the EIS/EIR should address the 
applicability of Executive Order 12114, Environmental Effects Abroad of Major Federal Actions, to the 
proposed action. This Executive Order was signed by President Carter on January 4, 1979, and requires 
that responsible officials of Federal agencies be informed of environmental considerations and take those 
considerations into account when making decisions on major Federal actions that could have 
environmental impacts anywhere beyond the borders of the United States, including Antarctica. 
Executive Order 12114 defined the environment to mean only the natural and physical environment and is 
applicable to the following categories of major Federal actions abroad: 

• actions significantly affecting the environment of the global commons outside the 
jurisdiction of any nation (e.g., the oceans and the upper atmosphere); 

• actions significantly affecting the environment of a foreign nation not participating with 
the United States and not otherwise involved in the action (e.g., the reentry of a 
spacecraft and impact on such nation's environment); and 

• actions significantly affecting the environment of a foreign nation that provide to that 
nation: 


• a product or physical project producing a principal product or an emission or 
effluent, which is prohibited or strictly regulated by Federal law, in the United 
States because its toxic effects on the environment create a serious public health 
risk; 

• a physical project that is prohibited in the United States or strictly regulated by 
Federal law to protect the environment against radioactive substances; and 

• actions significantly affecting natural or ecological resources of global 
importance, either designated for protection by the President or protected by a 
binding international agreement (e.g., protection of whales or migratory species, 
or binational transboundary agreements such as those between the United States 
and Canada). 

The North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project would not be included in one of the categories of 
Major Federal Actions described above and would not have significant environmental impacts outside the 
United States; therefore, Executive Order 12114 is not applicable to the proposed Project. 


1-19 


1.5 CONSISTENCY WITH REGIONAL AND LOCAL PLANS 


The proposed Project must be consistent or in conformance with the guidelines, management 
objectives, and/or designated uses set forth in regional and local plans for the Project area, or a plan 
amendment would be required. Plans that were reviewed for consistency include BLM resource 
management plans (RMPs), FWS RMPs, and local land management plans. A summary of the applicable 
plans and consistency information is presented below. 

1.5.1 Bureau of Land Management 

The proposed Project would cross BLM-administered lands under the jurisdiction of three field 
offices in Arizona and California and one district office in California. These include the California Desert 
District (CDD) Office, the Palm Springs-South Coast Field Office, the El Centro Field Office, and the 
Yuma Field Office. 

A review by the Agency Staffs of the RMPs for each of the listed field or district offices indicates 
that the proposed Project would not conform with some of these plans in their current forms, but that 
amendments to these plans would bring the proposed Project into conformance. At that time, the 
proposed Project would conform to BLM plans and programs, subject to site-specific conditions that may 
be implemented as a result of this analysis. The RMPs analyzed are summarized below. 

California Desert Conservation Area Plan 

The proposed North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project is not consistent with the BLM’s CDCA 
Plan. The BLM is considering amending this plan to the extent necessary to allow the Project. The 
majority of the proposed B-Line and IID Lateral fall within the CDCA. The BLM administers a 
comprehensive land use management plan for this area, which is referred to in this EIS/EIR as the CDCA 
Plan. The goal of the CDCA Plan is to provide for the educational, scientific, and recreational uses of 
public lands and resources within the CDCA in a manner that enhances and does not diminish the 
environmental, cultural, and aesthetic values of the desert and its productivity. According to the CDCA 
Plan, this goal is to be achieved through the direction given for management actions and resolution of 
conflicts. Direction is stated first on a geographic basis in guidelines set forth in each of four multiple-use 
classes (MUCs). Within those guidelines, further refinement of direction is expressed in the goals for 
each CDCA Plan element (e.g., cultural resources, wildlife, vegetation, wilderness, recreation, motorized- 
vehicle access, geology, and energy production and utility corridors). Direction is also expressed in 
certain site-specific CDCA Plan decisions such as Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs). 

The CDCA Plan, when approved, established four general MUCs: Controlled (Class C); Limited 
(Class L); Moderate (Class M); and Intensive (Class I). The four MUCs have been used to describe a 
different type and level or degree of use that is permitted within a particular area. However, certain uses 
of public lands, such as for utilities, may reach across all MUCs except Class C. Therefore, individual 
plan elements were created to further address issues specific to each MUC. One of those elements is the 
“Energy Production and Utility Corridor Element” which, among other things, establishes a network of 
joint-use planning corridors capable of meeting projected utility service needs. 

The CDCA Plan states that: “Applications for utility rights-of-way will be encouraged by BLM 
management to use designated corridors.” The proposed Project is not consistent with the CDCA Plan 
where portions of the proposed B-Line and IID Lateral deviate from designated utility corridors on BLM- 
managed land. This draft EIS/EIR proposes to modify those utility corridor decisions to the extent 
needed to allow the BLM to issue North Baja a permit for the proposed Project. The CDCA Plan 


1-20 


amendment process is discussed in Section 1.7. Additional discussion of the CDCA Plan and the 
proposed pipeline routes and designated utility corridors is presented in Sections 3.2.3.2 and 4.8.4. 

Although the proposed Project is not consistent with the current CDCA Plan, it would be 
consistent with previous projects and the goal of grouping similar land uses. The proposed B-Line would 
be entirely adjacent to North Baja’s existing A-Line, which was the subject of an amendment to the 
CDCA Plan and previously approved by the BLM in 2002. On BLM land within the CDCA, the B-Line 
includes 29.9 miles inside designated utility corridors and 20.8 miles outside of the utility corridors but 
within the previously approved A-Line right-of-way. The IID Lateral would be on BLM land within the 
CDCA for a total of 25.7 miles, of which 18.9 miles would be located within designated utility corridors. 
The remainder of the route outside of designated utility corridors would be within or adjacent to existing 
transportation (Interstate 8 and Evan Hewes Highway) and transmission line rights-of-way. 

Within the CDCA, the proposed facilities would be within three planning areas, each with its own 
approved management plan that was adopted as an amendment to the CDCA Plan. These three plans are 
described below. 

Northern and Eastern Colorado Desert Coordinated Management Plan 

The Northern and Eastern Colorado Desert (NECO) Coordinated Management Plan (NECO Plan) 
was approved and adopted as an amendment to the CDCA Plan in December 2002. The NECO Plan 
amends or creates land use plans and specific management prescriptions for species and habitats on 
Federal lands. The entire portion of the proposed B-Line within the CDCA would be in the NECO 
planning area except for the portion of the route between mileposts (MPs) 71.1 and 74.5. This portion of 
the route would be in the Imperial Sand Dunes Recreation Area (ISDRA), which is discussed in greater 
detail below. 

The NECO Plan establishes an 820,077-acre Desert Wildlife Management Area (DWMA) in the 
Chuckwalla area, which is an area designated by the FWS as critical habitat for the desert tortoise. Of the 
820,077 acres, about 465,300 acres are managed by the BLM. The NECO Plan eliminated the Milpitas 
Wash Wildlife Habitat Management Plan (WHMP) and Chuckwalla Bench ACEC for incorporation into 
the Chuckwalla DWMA. The proposed B-Line would not cross the Chuckwalla DWMA but would be 
immediately adjacent to the DWMA’s eastern boundary, which is on the west side of State Route (SR) 
78, between about MPs 35.0 and 46.0. 

The proposed Project is subject to section 7 consultation in accordance with the ESA, as 
amended, to address potential impacts on the desert tortoise, including cumulative impacts (see Section 
4.7). Although recovery of the desert tortoise is an important aspect of the NECO Plan, the plan also 
addresses the conservation of other species. For example, special mitigation measures avoiding 
disturbance of Couch’s spadefoot toad habitat should be strongly considered on all projects. North Baja 
has, through consultation with the CDFG, established avoidance and monitoring measures for the 
Couch’s spadefoot toad (see Section 4.7). The NECO Plan’s consideration of other desert endemic 
species and their habitats is reflected in this EIS/EIR. 

Western Colorado Desert Routes of Travel Designations Plan 

The Western Colorado Desert (WECO) Routes of Travel Designations Plan (WECO Plan) was 
approved and adopted as an amendment to the CDCA Plan in January 2003. The WECO Plan allows the 
BLM to manage the area in a way that balances OHV use on a designated trail system with the 
maintenance or improvement of special status species populations and other natural and cultural 
resources. The IID Lateral would be in the WECO planning area between MPs 7.9 and 27.6. The 


1-21 





majority of this portion of the IID Lateral would be in a designated utility corridor. An amendment to the 
CDCA Plan would be required for the portion of the route that deviates from a designated utility corridor 
on BLM land. A detailed discussion regarding OHV use in the Project area is provided in Section 4.8.5. 

Imperial Sand Dunes Recreation Area Management Plan 

The ISDRA was created in 1977 for the purpose of providing a formal space for OHV use. The 
ISDRA Management Plan (ISDRA Plan) was approved and adopted as an amendment to the CDCA Plan 
in March 2005. Like the WECO, which is west of and adjacent to the ISDRA, the ISDRA is primarily 
managed for OHV use in a way that is consistent with principles of multiple use and resource 
conservation. The B-Line would be in the ISDRA between MPs 71.1 and 74.5 and the IID Lateral would 
be in the ISDRA between MPs 0.0 and 7.9. The majority of the route in these areas would be in a 
designated utility corridor. An amendment to the CDCA Plan would be required for the portion of the 
route that deviates from a designated utility corridor on BLM land. Additional discussion of the ISDRA 
is presented in Section 4.8.4. 

Yuma District Resource Management Plan 

The proposed North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project is not consistent with the BLM’s current 
Yuma District Plan. The Yuma District Plan identifies special management areas in the vicinity of the 
Milpitas Wash. In general, the management objectives of the Yuma District Plan include consolidation, 
protection, and enhancement of wildlife habitat and habitat for plants of special management concern. 
North Baja proposes a number of conservation measures protecting wildlife and special status plants that 
are generally consistent with objectives of the management plans addressing the proposed activities in the 
Milpitas Wash area. The Yuma District Plan, however, prohibits new utilities or rights-of-way across the 
Milpitas Wash SMA. 

This draft EIS/EIR proposes to modify the land use plan decisions to the extent needed to allow 
the BLM to issue North Baja a permit to cross the Milpitas Wash SMA. In this location, the proposed B- 
Line would be adjacent to North Baja’s existing A-Line, which was the subject of an amendment to the 
Yuma District Plan and previously approved by the BLM in 2002. The Yuma District is currently in the 
process of revising its plan and is considering a proposal that would reroute the designated utility corridor 
to follow SR 78 through the Milpitas Wash SMA. The existing A-Line and proposed B-Line would be 
within the newly designated corridor; therefore, adoption of this revision would eliminate the need for a 
plan amendment for the proposed North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project. The revised plan, however, is 
not expected to be completed before the environmental review process for the proposed Project is 
completed. Therefore, for the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project, the EIS/EIR will be used by the 
BLM to consider amending the current Yuma District Plan, which would be necessary for any pipeline 
construction outside of a designated utility corridor. The Yuma District Plan amendment process is 
discussed in Section 1.7. Additional discussion of the Milpitas Wash SMA and North Baja’s proposed 
conservation measures is presented in Sections 4.6.2.4 and 4.8.4.2. 

1.5.2 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

Approximately 1.2 miles of the proposed B-Line would cross the Cibola NWR administered by 
the FWS. A decision that allows a crossing of the Cibola NWR must be compatible with the FWS 
Refuge Management Regulations in Part 603 FW 2.10(D). In approving a proposed utility right-of-way 
across the Cibola NWR, the Refuge Manager must find that none of the conditions listed in Part 603 FW 
2.10(D) exist with regards to the proposed Project. The existing A-Line complied with these conditions 
and a favorable Compatibility Determination was issued for the installation of that pipeline. The 


1-22 



proposed B-Line would be adjacent to the existing A-Line through the Cibola NWR; therefore, a 
favorable Compatibility Determination is expected to be issued for the proposed B-Line. 

1.5.3 Counties and Municipalities 

Every city and county in California has adopted a general plan to set forth policies guiding local 
land use and development. Each general plan contains a map that identifies the location of allowable land 
uses. These designated land use maps not only identify existing land uses, but also future potential uses 
of lands. The Project’s consistency with local land management plans was evaluated by consulting these 
land use plans and maps, as well as with officials from each county and municipality crossed by the 
Project. 

Riverside County, California 

The proposed North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project would not conflict with the Riverside 
County General Plan. The proposed B-Line and BEI Lateral would cross county lands that the Riverside 
County Land Use Ordinance designates as being for agricultural use. After construction, the buried 
pipeline would not interfere with agricultural land uses. A detailed discussion of agricultural lands 
affected by the Project is presented in Section 4.8.2. 

The Riverside County Board of Commissioners is considering the adoption of a new Land Use 
and Development Code. A review of the draft code has indicated that the proposed Project would not 
conflict with the code if it were to be adopted. 

City of Blythe, California 

The City of Blythe General Plan includes a public utilities element that urges the sharing of utility 
corridors and the burial of utility lines whenever possible. Because the proposed B-Line would be 
adjacent to North Baja’s existing A-Line and the pipeline would be buried, the proposed Project is 
consistent with the City of Blythe General Plan. 

Imperial County, California 

The proposed North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project would not conflict with the Imperial County 
General Plan or existing land use designations. The proposed B-Line and IID Lateral would both be 
located primarily in areas that are designated for Recreation/Open Space uses. After construction, the 
buried pipelines would not interfere with such land uses. The Imperial County Land Use Ordinance does 
not include guidelines for utility installation. A detailed discussion of recreation and public interest areas 
affected by the Project is presented in Section 4.8.5. 

1.6 PERMITS, APPROVALS, CONSULTATIONS, AND REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS 

Table 1.6-1 lists the major Federal, State, and local permits, approvals, and consultations 
identified for the construction and operation of the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project. North Baja 
would be responsible for obtaining all permits and approvals required to implement the proposed Project 
regardless of whether they appear in this table. 


1-23 


TABLE 1.6-1 


Major Permits, Approvals, and Consultations for the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 


Required Permit or Approval 


Agency Action 


Regulatory Agency 

FEDERAL 

Advisory Council on Historic 
Preservation 


Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 
(FERC) 


International Boundary and Water 
Commission 


U.S. Department of the Army Corps of 
Engineers (COE) 


U.S. Department of the Interior 

Bureau of Land Management (BLM) 


Section 106 Consultation, National 
Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) 


Certificate of Public Convenience and 
Necessity 

Presidential Permit 


Compliance with International Treaties 
and Conventions 


Section 10, Rivers and Harbors Act 
Permit 

Section 404, Clean Water Act (CWA) 
Permit 


Antiquities and Cultural Resource Use 
Permit 


California Desert Conservation Area 
(CDCA) Plan Amendment 

Yuma District Resource Management 
Plan (Yuma District Plan) Amendment 

Right-of-Way Grant 


Temporary Use Permit 


Plan of Development 


Notice to Proceed 


Has the opportunity to comment if the 
Project may affect cultural resources 
that are either listed on or eligible for 
listing on the National Register of 
Historic Places. 

Determine whether the construction and 
operation of a natural gas pipeline 
project is in the public interest. 

Consider issuance of an amendment of 
North Baja’s permit for interconnection 
of natural gas transmission facilities at 
the international border of the United 
States and Mexico. 

Review and approve Project 
components as they relate to the 
international boundary, boundary 
monuments, and potential changes to 
surface runoff characteristics at the 
international border. 

Consider issuance of a section 10 
permit for construction across the 
Colorado River. 

Consider issuance of a section 404 
permit for the placement of dredge or fill 
material into all waters of the United 
States, including jurisdictional wetlands. 

Consider issuance of antiquities and 
cultural resources use permit to conduct 
surveys and to excavate or remove 
cultural resources on Federal lands. 

Consider amending the CDCA Plan. 

Consider amending the Yuma District 
Plan. 

Consider granting rights-of-way and 
temporary use permits for portions of 
the Project that would encroach on 
Federal lands, including easements 
across federally owned waterways. 

Consider issuance of a temporary use 
permit for temporary activities in a 
construction right-of-way. 

Consider approval of detailed 
Construction, Operation, and 
Maintenance Plan. 

Following issuance of the right-of-way 
grant and approval of the Construction, 
Operation, and Maintenance Plan, 
consider issuance of a Notice to 
Proceed with Project development and 
mitigation activities. 


1-24 




TABLE 1.6-1 (cont’d) 


Major Permits, Approvals, and Consultations for the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 


Regulatory Agency 

Required Permit or Approval 

Agency Action 

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) 

Right-of-Way Grant 

Provide concurrence for BLM to issue 
amended Right-of-Way Grant covering 
BOR lands. 


Hydrostatic Test Coordination 

In conjunction with the Imperial Irrigation 
District, consult with North Baja 
regarding the withdrawal and discharge 
of hydrostatic test water from and to the 
All-American Canal. 

U.S. Department of Justice 

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, 

Firearms, and Explosives 

Explosive User’s Permit 

Consider issuance of permit to 
purchase, store, and use explosives for 
site preparation during pipeline 
construction. 

U.S. Department of Transportation 
Federal Highway Administration 

Encroachment Permit 

Consider issuance of permit for pipeline 
crossing of federally funded highways. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 
Region IX 

Section 401, CWA, Water Quality 
Certification 

In conjunction with states, consider 
issuance of water use and crossing 
permits. 


Section 402, CWA, National Pollutant 
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) 

In conjunction with states, review and 
issue NPDES permit for discharge of 
hydrostatic test water. 


Section 404, CWA 

Review CWA, section 404 applications 
for wetland dredge-and-fill applications 
for the COE with 404(c) veto power for 
wetland permits issued by the COE. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) 

Section 7 Consultation, Biological 

Opinion (Endangered Species Act) 

Consider lead agency finding of impact 
on federally listed or proposed species. 
Provide Biological Opinion if the Project 
is likely to adversely affect federally 
listed or proposed species or their 
habitats. 


Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act 

Provide comments to prevent loss of 
and damage to wildlife resources. 


Compatibility Determination 

Provide concurrence for BLM to issue 
amended Right-of-Way Grant covering 
FWS lands. 

ARIZONA 



Arizona Department of Environmental 
Quality, Division of Water Quality 

Section 401, CWA, Water Quality 
Certification 

Consider approval of certification of 
activities related to dredge and fill 
materials. 


Storm Water Construction Permit 

Consider issuance of permit for 
discharge of stormwater into waters of 
the United States. 


Construction Dewatering Permit (if 
necessary) 

Consider issuance of permit regulating 
discharge of intruded or stormwater 
from construction excavation to land or 
waters of the United States. 

Arizona Game and Fish Department 

Threatened and Endangered Species 
Clearance 

Consider issuance of biological 
clearance for State-listed species. 

Arizona State Historic Preservation 

Office 

Section 106 Consultation, NHPA 

Consult with the FERC, Project 
Applicant, appropriate land 
management agencies, and others 
regarding activities potentially affecting 
cultural resources. 

Arizona State Lands Department, 

Natural Resources Division 

Soil Erosion, Sedimentation Control, 
and Spill Plan Approval 

Consider approval of Soil Erosion, 
Sedimentation Control, and Spill Plans 
in coordination with local conservation 
districts. 


1-25 




TABLE 1.6-1 (cont’d) 

Major Permits, Approvals, and Consultations for the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 


Regulatory Agency 


CALIFORNIA 

California Department of Fish and Game 


California Department of Transportation 

California Regional Water Quality 
Control Board, Colorado River Basin 
Region 


California State Historic Preservation 
Office 


California State Lands Commission 


Imperial Air Pollution Control District 

Mojave Desert Air Quality Management 
District 

IMPERIAL COUNTY 

Board of Supervisors 

Planning Department 


Public Works Department 


Required Permit or Approval 
Easement 

Temporary Use Permit 

California Endangered Species Act 

California Native Plant Protection Act 

Streambed Alteration Agreement 
(section 1603 of the California Fish and 
Game Code) 

Encroachment Permit 

Section 401, CWA, Water Quality 
Certification 

NPDES Hydrostatic Test Permit 
Storm Water Construction Permit 

Construction Dewatering Permit (if 
necessary) 

Section 106 Consultation, NHPA 

Environmental Impact Statement/ 
Environmental Impact Report (EIS/EIR) 

Statement of Overriding Considerations 

Amendment to Lease of State Lands 
Dust Control Plan 
Dust Control Plan 

Franchise Agreement 
Temporary Use Permit 

Encroachment Permit 


Agency Action 

Consider authorization of an easement 
for the pipeline crossing of State lands. 

Consider issuance of a temporary use 
permit for extra workspace associated 
with the Colorado River horizontal 
directional drill. 

Consider issuance of a section 2081 
incidental take permit for State-only 
listed species and a section 2080.1 
consistency determination for effects on 
species that are both State- and 
federally listed. 

Review of mitigation agreement and 
mitigation plan for plants listed as rare. 

Consider issuance of section 1603 
Streambed Alteration Agreement. 

Consider issuance of permit to cross or 
bore under State highways. 

Consider approval of certification of 
activities related to dredge and fill 
materials. 

Consider issuance of permit for 
discharge of hydrostatic test water. 

Consider issuance of permit for 
discharge of stormwater into waters of 
the United States. 

Consider issuance of permit regulating 
discharge of intruded or stormwater 
from construction excavation to land or 
waters of the United States. 

Consult with the FERC, Project 
Applicant, appropriate land 
management agencies, and others 
regarding activities potentially affecting 
cultural resources. 

Consider certification of the EIS/EIR. 

Consider issuance of a Statement of 
Overriding Considerations for impacts 
identified in the EIS/EIR that cannot be 
reduced to a level that is less than 
significant. 

Consider amendment to Lease of State 
Lands. 

Consider dust control plan for 
construction. 

Consider dust control plan for 
construction. 

Consider issuance of franchise 
agreement. 

Consider issuance of temporary use 
permit for pipe storage and contractor 
yards. 

Consider issuance of an encroachment 
permit. 


1-26 




TABLE 1.6-1 (cont’d) 

Major Permits, Approvals, and Consultations for the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 

Regulatory Agency 

Required Permit or Approval 

Agency Action 


Road Crossing Permit 

Consider issuance of road crossing 
permit. 

Sheriff’s Department 

Explosives Permit 

Consider issuance of a license to store 
flammable explosives. 

IMPERIAL VALLEY IRRIGATION 

Encroachment Permit 

Consider issuance of an encroachment 

DISTRICT 


permit. 


Trench Dewatering Permit 

Consider issuance of trench dewatering 
permit. 

PALO VERDE IRRIGATION DISTRICT 

Crossing Agreement 

Consider issuance of a crossing 
agreement. 

RIVERSIDE COUNTY 

Trench Dewatering Permit 

Consider issuance of trench dewatering 
permit. 

Board of Supervisors 

Franchise Agreement 

Consider issuance of franchise 
agreement. 

Transportation Department 

Encroachment Permit 

Consider issuance of encroachment 
permit. 

Planning Department 

Temporary Use Permit 

Consider issuance of temporary use 
permit for pipe storage and contractor 
staging yards. 

CITY OF BLYTHE 

Encroachment Permit 

Consider issuance of an encroachment 
permit. 


Grading Permit 

Consider issuance of a grading permit. 

CITY OF EL CENTRO 

Encroachment Permit 

Consider issuance of an encroachment 
permit. 


1-27 




For the BLM, the proposed Federal actions are whether to amend the CDCA Plan, as amended 
(1980), and the Yuma District Plan, as amended (1985), allowing for a one-time exemption to the plans, 
and whether to grant rights-of-way to North Baja for the installation of the B-Line and IID Lateral, plus 
ancillary facilities, across Federal lands managed by the BLM, the BOR, and the FWS. 

The proposed B-Line and IID Lateral pipeline alignments and ancillary facilities are located 
within and outside BLM-designated utility corridors. In addition, portions of the pipelines would cross 
the Milpitas Wash SMA and the NECO, WECO, and ISDRA planning areas. As discussed in Section 
1.5, before any rights-of-way may be issued, plan amendments must be approved to allow for an 
exemption to the utility corridor element of the CDCA Plan and the special management areas element of 
the Yuma District Plan. The proposed amendments are under consideration to accommodate the North 
Baja Pipeline Expansion Project only, and would not create a new corridor or modify existing corridors. 
The BLM plan amendment process is described in detail in Section 1.7. 

As a cooperating agency, the BLM proposes to adopt this draft EIS/EIR per Title 40 CFR Part 
1506.3 to meet its responsibilities under NEPA and its planning regulations per Title 43 CFR Part 1610. 
As a BLM NEPA document, this EIS/EIR includes an analysis of the direct, indirect, and cumulative 
impacts of granting the aforementioned rights-of-way and alternatives on BLM-managed public lands. 
This EIS/EIR includes all the required elements per Title 43 CFR Part 1610, such as public participation, 
consistency review, issue identification, development of planning criteria, formulation of alternatives, 
environmental impact analysis, and protest procedures. 

1.7 BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT PROCESS 

1.7.1 Regulatory Requirements 

Section 202 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) states: “The Secretary 
shall, with public involvement ... develop, maintain, and when appropriate, revise land use plans which 
provide by tracts or areas for the use of the public lands” (43 United States Code [USC] 1712). The 
regulations for making and modifying land use plans and planning decisions are found in Title 43 CFR 
Part 1600. The proposed land use plan amendments shall follow the regulations as set forth in Title 43 
CFR Part 1610, Resource Management Planning. In short, an interdisciplinary approach shall be used in 
amending resource plans. The disciplines of the preparers shall be appropriate to the values involved and 
the issues identified for the amendment. The amendment shall be analyzed through the NEPA process. 
Through the NEPA process the public and other Federal, State, and local governments shall be provided 
opportunities to meaningfully participate in and comment on the preparation of amendments and be given 
early notice of planning activities. The analysis and public involvement for the proposed land use plan 
amendments shall coincide, to the extent possible, with the public notices, hearings, and comment periods 
of this EIS/EIR for the proposed North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project. 

1.7.2 Need for Plan Amendments 

An amendment to the CDCA Plan is required because the proposed B-Line deviates from a 
designated utility corridor on BLM land at five locations in the CDCA for a total length of approximately 
20.8 miles (MPs 34.2 to 36.5, MPs 53.8 to 65.2, MPs 68.3 to 70.4, MPs 71.7 to 74.3, and MPs 77.4 to 
79.8). In addition, the IID Lateral deviates from a designated utility corridor on BLM land at three 
locations in the CDCA for a total length of approximately 6.8 miles (MPs 18.9 to 24.5, MPs 24.9 to 26.0, 
and MPs 27.5 to 27.6). The locations requiring a CDCA Plan amendment are shown on Figure 1.7.2-1. 


1-28 



Figure 1.7.2-1 

North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 

Locations Requiring a BLM Plan Amendment 


1-29 











































































An amendment to the Yuma District Plan is required because a portion of the proposed B-Line 
that deviates from a designated utility corridor on BLM land crosses the Milpitas Wash SMA for 
approximately 2.5 miles (MPs 29.8 to 30.3, MPs 30.4 to 30.6, MPs 32.2 to 32.7, and MPs 32.9 to 34.2) 
(see Figure 1.7.2-1). The Yuma District Plan prohibits the location of new utility facilities in SMAs. 

Although the B-Line deviates from designated utility corridors within the CDCA and within the 
Milpitas Wash SMA, it would be collocated with North Baja’s existing A-Line. The BLM approved plan 
amendments to both the CDCA and Yuma District Plans to accommodate the A-Line in 2002. Where the 
IID Lateral is outside of a designated utility corridor, the route would primarily follow or abut other 
previously disturbed corridors established by roads (rather than utilities) such as Interstate 8 and Evan 
Hewes Highway. 

If the plan(s) are not amended, the BLM may authorize installation of the Project within existing 
corridors only, or the BLM may deny the Project if the existing corridor option does not prove feasible. 
Section 1.7.5 summarizes the alternative routes considered and Section 3 provides a comparison of the 
alternatives. 

1.7.3 Identification of Issues 

Major issues raised by the BLM and other agencies include: potential impact on special status 
species, including the desert tortoise; potential impact on desert wildlife habitat; potential for OHV route 
proliferation; timing of construction; and visual impacts. These issues are addressed in Section 4. 

1.7.4 Planning Criteria 

Planning criteria (Title 43 CFR Part 1610.4-2) are parameters that guide development of the land 
use plan amendment to ensure the planning process is tailored to the issues and that unnecessary data 
collection is avoided. Planning criteria are based on standards prescribed by applicable laws and 
regulations; agency guidance; and the result of coordination with the public, tribes, and other Federal, 
State, and local government agencies. The BLM has prepared the planning criteria for the proposed land 
use plan amendments as presented below. 

Planning and NEPA 

The proposed land use plan amendments shall not amend the majority of the decisions, goals, and 
objectives established in the CDCA Plan or the Yuma District Plan and these decisions shall remain in 
effect. The plan amendment process shall be conducted in compliance with the FLPMA, planning 
regulations at Title 43 CFR Part 1600, BLM manual guidance, and all applicable Federal laws affecting 
BLM land use decisions. The planning process shall include an environmental analysis prepared in 
compliance with NEPA, the CEQ regulations at Title 40 CFR Part 1500, and BLM guidance. 

Consistency with Other Land Use Plans and Ongoing BLM Planning Efforts 

The BLM’s land use plans and amendments must be consistent with officially approved or 
adopted resource-related plans of Native American tribes, other Federal agencies, and State and local 
governments to the maximum extent practical, given that the BLM’s land use plans must also be 
consistent with the purposes, policies, and programs of the FLPMA, as well as other Federal laws and 
regulations applicable to pubic lands (Title 43 CFR Part 1610.3-2[a]). Consistency with current land use 
plans is discussed in Section 1.5. 


1-30 


1.7.5 Alternatives Considered in the Analysis 

An alternative this EIS/EIR must consider is that North Baja use existing corridors, as designated 
in the CDCA Plan (BLM 1980 as amended) for its entire route across public land in California. In 1980 
when the CDCA Plan was issued, utility corridors 2 to 5 miles wide were designated, mostly along 
existing pipelines and transmission lines (BLM 1980). Several additional corridors were subsequently 
designated. The intent of the CDCA Plan was to limit future disturbance and land use designation for 
utilities to previously disturbed areas already carrying utilities. By the legislation enabling the CDCA 
Plan, a plan amendment is required to allow an exception to the plan’s designated utility corridors. 

As part of the EIS/EIR for the original North Baja Pipeline Project (referred to in this EIS/EIR as 
the A-Line), the alternative of following designated utility corridors was considered. Based on the 
analysis conducted for that Project, the route selected for the A-Line, including the deviations from 
designated utility corridors and the crossing of the Milpitas Wash SMA, was determined to be 
environmentally preferable to a route that remained within designated utility corridors. The proposed B- 
Line would be adjacent to the existing A-Line for the entire route. The collocation of facilities is 
generally preferred by land management agencies, land use planners, and other regulatory agencies and 
has several inherent engineering and environmental advantages. Perhaps the most important of these 
advantages is that new land disturbance is minimized. Because of the advantages of collocation, and 
because the route selected for the A-Line that would be followed for the B-Line was previously 
determined to be environmentally preferable to a route that remains within a designated utility corridor, 
alternatives for the B-Line route that would follow designated utility corridors are not considered in this 
EIS/EIR. 

Along the IID Lateral, North Baja proposes to deviate from a designated utility corridor at three 
locations within the CDCA. Two alternative routes were examined to stay within a designated utility 
corridor for a longer distance than the proposed route. These alternatives are referred to as the Corridor L 
Alternative and the Bond’s Corner Alternative. A detailed discussion of these alternatives is presented in 
Section 3.2.3.2. 

1.7.6 Agency Coordination 

The BLM and the FWS have worked closely with North Baja representatives throughout the 
process of collecting information for this environmental analysis. Additionally, BLM and FWS personnel 
have consulted informally on the impacts of the corridor exception, on North Baja’s proposed restoration 
plan, and on the potential impacts on desert wildlife habitat and the desert tortoise. 

1.7.7 Public Participation 

BLM planning regulations (Title 40 CFR Part 1601-1610) provide for specific points of public 
involvement in environmental analysis and land use planning decisions including plan amendments. The 
review and analysis of the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project follows the BLM guidelines for public 
participation and opportunity to comment, as well as those of the FERC and the CSLC. As discussed in 
Section 1.3, the Agency Staffs issued a NOI/NOP on August 30, 2005 that briefly described the Project, 
announced that the BLM would be using the EIS/EIR to consider an amendment to the CDCA Plan and 
the Yuma District Plan, and described the EIS/EIR process and the BLM’s plan amendment process. 
Two public scoping meetings were held to provide an opportunity for agencies and the general public to 
learn more about the proposed Project and participate in the environmental analysis by commenting on 
the issues/impacts to be addressed in the EIS/EIR. The environmental issues/impacts that were identified 
during the scoping process are summarized in Section 1.3. 


1-31 


This draft EIS/EIR was filed with the EPA; submitted to the California State Clearinghouse; and 
mailed to Federal, State, and local government agencies; elected officials; Native American tribes; 
affected landowners; local libraries and newspapers; intervenors in the FERC’s proceeding; and other 
interested parties (i.e., miscellaneous individuals who provided scoping comments or asked to be on the 
mailing list). A formal notice indicating that the draft EIS/EIR was available for review and comment 
was published in the Federal Register and posted in the appropriate County Clerks’ offices in California. 
Because the draft EIS/EIR is also a draft BLM land use plan amendment, the public has 90 days instead 
of the typical 45 days after the date of publication in the Federal Register to review and comment on the 
draft EIS/EIR both in the form of written comments and at two public meetings to be held in the Project 
area. All comments received on the draft EIS/EIR and draft land use plan amendment related to 
environmental issues will be addressed in the final EIS/EIR. 

Before the BLM approves the CDCA or Yuma District Plan amendment decisions, the Governor 
of California will have an opportunity to review the proposed decision for consistency with State and 
local plans. 


1-32 


PROJECT DESCRIPTION 


















































2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 


2.1 PROPOSED FACILITIES 

North Baja proposes to expand its existing natural gas transmission pipeline system between 
Ehrenberg, Arizona and an interconnection at the international border between the United States and 
Mexico. The North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project would involve the construction and operation of a 
pipeline loop, two pipeline laterals, an interconnect pipeline, an odorant facility, two meter stations, 
modifications at North Baja’s existing compressor and meter stations, and installation of mainline and 
lateral valves and pig launchers and receivers. An overview map of the Project location and facilities is 
provided on Figure 2.1-1. Detailed maps showing the pipeline routes, aboveground facilities, contractor 
yards, and access roads are in Appendix B. 

2.1.1 Pipeline Facilities 

North Baja’s existing system between Ehrenberg, Arizona and the U.S.-Mexico border consists of 
79.8 miles of 30- and 36-inch-diameter pipeline (referred to in this EIS/EIR as the A-Line). The A-Line 
was installed in 2002 as part of the North Baja Pipeline Project (Docket Nos. CPO1-22-000, et al.). The 
pipeline facilities proposed by North Baja to expand its existing system would consist of approximately 

126.1 miles of pipeline loop and laterals of various diameters. Table 2.1.1-1 lists the proposed pipeline 
facilities by name, pipe diameter, milepost range, length, and location. The proposed pipeline facilities 
include: 

• B-Line - 79.8 miles of pipeline loop consisting of 11.7 miles of 42-inch-diameter 
pipeline extending from the existing Ehrenberg Compressor Station at MP 0.0 in La Paz 
County, Arizona to the existing Rannells Trap at MP 11.7 in Riverside County, California 
and 68.1 miles of 48-inch-diameter pipeline extending from Rannells Trap to an 
interconnection at the U.S.-Mexico border at MP 79.8 in Imperial County, California; 

• SoCal Gas Interconnect - less than 0.1 mile (about 20 feet) of 36-inch-diameter pipeline 
to connect the B-Line to the existing SoCal Gas system within the proposed Blythe Meter 
Station site at MP 0.5 in Riverside County; 

• BEI Lateral - 0.6 mile of 10-inch-diameter pipeline extending from the proposed Blythe 
Meter Station site to an interconnection with the existing Blythe Energy Facility I supply 
pipeline in Riverside County; and 

• IIP Lateral - 45.7 miles of 16-inch-diameter pipeline extending from MP 74.5 of the B- 
Line near the existing Ogilby Meter Station in Imperial County to the existing IID El 
Centro Generating Station in Imperial County. 

The design pressure and maximum allowable operating pressure (MAOP) of the pipeline facilities 
would be 1,150 pounds per square inch gauge (psig). The normal operating pressure would be 1,050 psig. 


2-1 









Riverside 
Co. 

Desert 

Center 




Midland 


Proposed Blythe 
Meter Station and 
SoCal Gas 
Interconnect Pipeline. 


Existing 36-inch-diameter 
North Baja A-Line 


Proposed 0.6-mile-long 
10-inch-diameter BEI Lateral 




osed 11.7-mile-long 
2-inch-diameter 
orth Baja B-Line 


bola 


Saltan 

Sea 


Niland 



Chocolate Mountain 
Naval Aerial 
Gunnery Range 


A.L1Z.0 LlcL 

( ihnla rake 



Existing Ehrenberg 
Compressor Station 
and El Paso 
Meter Station 


La Paz' 
_ Co . 


Yuma 

Proving 

Ground 


Calipatria 


Ranter 


Existing 30-inch-diameter 
North Baja A-Line 


\fdobe 




MartinezLake 
• \ *- i m 

la 


Proposed El Centro 
Meter Station 


Imperial 


El Centro 


Existing Ogilby 
Meter Station and 
Proposed Odorant 
Facility 


Ilaughtelin _ 

ukDjz 

Yunia* 


Mittrv Lake 

A 


aV>- 


f Kinter 


Blaisdell 


Fortuna 

Foothills 


Mexico 


Tie-In to Gasoducto 
Bajanorte Pipeline 


Somerton 


Existing North Baja A-Line 
Proposed North Baja B-Line 
Proposed BEI Lateral 
Proposed I ID Lateral 


(Gadsden 

San 

Luis 


Ligurta 

Yuma 

■ CP. 


Barry M. 
GoldwaterAir 
Force Range 


Figure 2.1-1 

North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 

Project Overview Map 


2-2 



















































TABLE 2.1.1-1 

Pipeline Facilities Associated with the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 


Facility_Pipe Diameter (inches) Milepost Range Length (miles) County, State 


B-Line 

42 

0.0-0.2 

0.2 

La Paz, Arizona 



0.2-11.7 

11.5 

Riverside, California 

Subtotal 



11.7 



48 

11.7-22.3 

10.6 

Riverside, California 



22.3 - 79.8 

57.5 

Imperial, California 

Subtotal 



68.1 


B-Line Total 



79.8 


SoCal Gas Interconnect a 

36 

at 0.5 

<0.1 

Riverside, California 

BEI Lateral 

10 

0.0-0.6 b 

0.6 

Riverside, California 

IID Lateral 

16 

0.0 - 45.7 c 

45.7 

Imperial, California 

Project Total 



126.1 



The SoCal Gas Interconnect is entirely within the Blythe Meter Station site. Its impacts will be addressed throughout the 
EIS/EIR as part of the impacts of the Blythe Meter Station. 

The BEI Lateral connects to the B-Line at MP 0.5. 

The IID Lateral connects to the B-Line at MP 74.5. 


2.1.2 Aboveground Facilities 

Associated aboveground facilities proposed by North Baja include (see Table 2.1.2-1): 

• modifications at the existing Ehrenberg Compressor Station in La Paz County and the 
existing Ogilby Meter Station in Imperial County to allow northbound flow of natural 
gas; 

• metering modifications inside the existing El Paso Meter Station at the Ehrenberg 
Compressor Station site to allow LNG-source gas to be delivered into the El Paso system; 

• installation of one meter station (Blythe Meter Station) in Riverside County to measure 
gas delivery from the North Baja system to SoCal Gas and the BEI Lateral; 

• installation of one odorant facility at the existing Ogilby Meter Station in Imperial 
County to odorize the natural gas before delivery into the SoCal Gas system; 

• installation of one meter station (El Centro Meter Station) at the existing IID El Centro 
Generating Station in Imperial County to measure gas delivery from the North Baja 
system to the IID; 

• installation of one tap where the IID Lateral would connect to the B-Line in Imperial 
County; 

• installation of three pig launchers, one at Rannells Trap in Riverside County, one at the 
Ogilby Meter Station in Imperial County, and one where the IID Lateral would connect 
with the B-Line in Imperial County; 


2-3 








• installation of four pig receivers, one at the Ehrenberg Compressor Station, one at 
Rannells Trap, one at the Ogilby Meter Station, and one at the end of the IID Lateral at 
the IID El Centro Generating Station; 

• installation of nine remote manual valves with automatic shutdown capability on the B- 
Line, adjacent to the existing A-Line valve sites; and 

• installation of four remote manual valves with automatic shutdown capability on the IID 
Lateral. 


TABLE 2.1.2-1 




Aboveground Facilities Associated with the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 

Facility 

Approximate 

Milepost 

Diameter 

(inches) 

County, State 

B-Line 




Ehrenberg Compressor Station Modifications and Pig Receiver 

0.0 

42 

La Paz, AZ 

El Paso Meter Station Modifications 

0.0 

- 

La Paz, AZ 

Blythe Meter Station 

0.5 

- 

Riverside, CA 

Rannells Trap Pig Launcher and Receiver 

11.7 

42/48 

Riverside, CA 

Valve #1 

0.0 

48 

Riverside, CA 

Valve #2 

5.7 

48 

Riverside, CA 

Valve #3 

11.7 

48 

Riverside, CA 

Valve #4 

11.7 

48 

Riverside, CA 

Valve #5 

28.0 

48 

Imperial, CA 

Valve #6 

41.6 

48 

Imperial, CA 

Valve #7 

60.3 

48 

Imperial, CA 

Valve #8 

75.2 

48 

Imperial, CA 

Valve #9 

75.2 

48 

Imperial, CA 

Ogilby Meter Station Modifications, Odorant Facility, and Pig 

Launcher and Receiver 

75.2 

48 

Imperial, CA 

IID Lateral 




Tap at B-Line and Pig Launcher 

0.0 

16 

Imperial, CA 

Valve #1 

0.0 

16 

Imperial, CA 

Valve #2 

7.6 

16 

Imperial, CA 

Valve #3 

27.2 

16 

Imperial, CA 

Valve #4 

38.7 

16 

Imperial, CA 

El Centro Meter Station and Pig Receiver 

45.7 

16 

Imperial, CA 


2.2 LAND REQUIREMENTS 

Table 2.2-1 summarizes the land requirements for the Project. A detailed description and 
breakdown of land requirements and use is presented in Section 4.8.2. Construction of the North Baja 
Pipeline Expansion Project would disturb approximately 1,745.5 acres of land, including the pipeline 
facilities, aboveground facilities, pipe storage and contractor yards, and access roads. Approximately 
108.7 acres of the 1,745.5 acres used for construction would be required for operation of the Project. Of 
this total, about 102.9 acres would be for the pipeline facilities, 5.4 acres would be for the aboveground 
facilities, and 0.4 acre would be for permanent access roads associated with the proposed facilities. The 
remaining 1,636.8 acres of land would be restored and allowed to revert to former use. 


2-4 





TABLE 2.2-1 


Summary of Land Requirements Associated with the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 

Land Affected During Land Affected During 

Facility Construction (acres) Operation (acres) 

Pipeline Facilities 


Pipeline Right-of-Way 
B-Line a 
BEI Lateral b 
IID Lateral c 

Pipeline Right-of-Way Total 

Temporary Extra Workspace 
B-Line 
BEI Lateral 
IID Lateral 

Temporary Extra Workspace Total 
Pipeline Facilities Total 


1,015.5 

0.0 

4.4 

0.7 

360.2 

102.2 

1,380.1 

102.9 

128.2 

0.0 

0.1 

0.0 

43.1 

00 

171.4 

0.0 

1,551.5 

102.9 


Aboveground Facilities 
B-Line 

Ehrenberg Compressor Station Modifications and 0.7 

Pig Receiver 

El Paso Meter Station Modifications 0.0 

Blythe Meter Station 4.3 

Rannells Trap Pig Launcher and Receiver 0.3 

Ogilby Meter Station Modifications, Odorant Facility, 0.4 

and Pig Launcher and Receiver 

Valves TO 

B-Line Subtotal 6.8 

IID Lateral 

Tap at B-Line and Pig Launcher 0.2 

El Centro Meter Station and Pig Receiver 2.5 

Valves 0J> 

IID Lateral Subtotal 2.9 

Aboveground Facilities Total 9.7 


0.0 

0.0 

4.3 
0.3 
0.4 

< 0.1 

5.0 

0.2 

0.2 

O0 

0.4 

5.4 


Pipe Storage and Contractor Yards 


73.1 


0.0 


Access Roads 

B-Line 99-9 9.2 

BEI Lateral 0.1 0.1 

IID Lateral 11-2 0J. 

Access Roads Total 111.2 0.4 

Project Total 1,745.5 108.7 


2-5 









Facility 


TABLE 2.2-1 (cont'd) 


Summary of Land Requirements Associated with the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 

Land Affected During Land Affected During 

Construction (acres) Operation (acres) 


Based on a 105-foot-wide construction right-of-way in all areas except along 18 ,h Avenue where a 60-foot-wide 
construction right-of-way would be used. No additional permanent right-of-way would be required because the B-Line 
would be installed in North Baja’s existing 50-foot-wide permanent right-of-way using a standard 25-foot offset from the 
existing A-Line. 

Based on a 60-foot-wide construction right-of-way in all areas. Based on a 30-foot-wide permanent right-of-way in all 
areas except along Riviera Drive where a 1-foot-wide permanent right-of-way was assumed. The actual width of the 
permanent right-of-way along Riviera Drive would be determined under an agreement between North Baja and the City 
of Blythe. 

Based on an 80-foot-wide construction right-of-way where the route would parallel existing powerlines and a 60-foot¬ 
wide construction right-of-way where the route would be installed between a powerline and a road and within or 
abutting the traveled portion of county roads. Based on a 30-foot-wide permanent right-of-way in all areas except 
along Evan Hewes Highway and other county roads where a 2-foot-wide permanent right-of-way was assumed. The 
actual width of the permanent right-of-way along Imperial County roads would be determined under an agreement 
between North Baja and Imperial County. 

Note: The totals shown in this table may not equal the sum of addends due to rounding. 


2-6 






Construction and operation activities on approximately 90 percent of the lands affected by the 
Project would be authorized by various governmental entities including: the BLM (for Federal lands 
managed by the BLM, the BOR, and the FWS [53 percent]), California counties (36 percent), the States 
of Arizona or California or cities (1 percent), or the CSLC (<1 percent). The remainder of the land that 
would be affected (10 percent) is privately owned. No tribal land would be crossed. A detailed 
description of land ownership is presented in Section 4.8.2. 

2.2.1 Pipeline Facilities 

Of the approximately 1,551.5 acres of land that would be disturbed during construction of the 
pipeline facilities, about 1,380.1 acres would be disturbed by the pipeline right-of-way and 171.4 acres 
would be disturbed by temporary extra workspace. About 858.5 acres or 55 percent is previously 
disturbed area associated with construction and operation of North Baja’s existing A-Line. Operation of 
the pipeline facilities would require about 102.9 acres of land. 

Of the 126.1 miles of proposed pipeline loop and laterals, approximately 125.4 miles (99 percent) 
would be constructed in or adjacent to various existing rights-of-way (see Table 2.2.1-1). The B-Line and 
BEI Lateral would be entirely in or adjacent to existing rights-of-way. Of the 45.7 miles associated with 
the IID Lateral, 0.7 mile (2 percent) would be constructed on newly created right-of-way that does not 
parallel existing rights-of-way. 

North Baja proposes to generally use a 105-foot-wide construction right-of-way for the B-Line, 
consisting of North Baja’s existing 50-foot-wide permanent right-of-way and 55 feet of temporary 
workspace. In most areas, about 80 feet of the construction right-of-way would overlap the previously 
disturbed right-of-way. The B-Line would be installed within North Baja’s existing 50-foot-wide 
permanent right-of-way using a standard 25-foot offset from the existing A-Line. No new permanent 
right-of-way would be required for operation of the B-Line. In the Palo Verde Valley, the B-Line would 
generally be installed to the south or east of the existing A-Line. For the remainder of the route, the B- 
Line would typically be west of the existing A-Line. 

Where the B-Line would be installed within or abutting the paved portion of 18th Avenue (a 
distance of about 7.6 miles), rights to build and operate the pipeline within the county road right-of-way 
would be authorized under a franchise agreement with Riverside County. Franchise agreements do not 
typically grant a specific strip of land, but simply allow the pipeline to be installed and operated within 
the road right-of-way. North Baja proposes to use a 60-foot-wide construction right-of-way to install the 
B-Line in the paved portion of 18 th Avenue. North Baja’s typical right-of-way cross sections along the 
proposed B-Line are in Appendix C. 

During the scoping process, one commentor suggested that North Baja install the B-Line closer to 
the existing A-Line than its proposed 25-foot separation. Twenty-five feet is a standard separation 
distance used by many looped pipelines. This distance ensures a margin of safety during construction and 
operation of the pipeline and it maintains a symmetrical distance between the pipelines and the easement 
boundaries, which can help avoid future encroachment issues. However, some looped systems do employ 
a 20-foot separation or less where site-specific conditions require that the pipelines be closer together 
(e.g., heavily urbanized areas). In the case of the proposed Project, nothing would be gained by 
decreasing the separation between the proposed B-Line and the existing A-Line because North Baja 
already proposes to utilize the full width of the previously disturbed right-of-way and the workspace 
requirements would not be reduced by placing the B-Line closer to the A-Line. In other words, placing 
the proposed B-Line closer to the existing A-Line would not result in a reduction in disturbance to 
previously undisturbed land. 


2-7 


TABLE 2.2.1-1 


Location of Adjacent Existing Rights-of-Way in Relation to the Proposed Pipeline Facilities 


Facility 

Beginning 

Milepost 

Ending 

Milepost 

Segment 

Length 

(miles) 

Existing Right-of-Way 

Relationship to 
Existing Rights-of- 
Way 

B-Line 

0.0 

0.5 

0.5 

A-Line 

South 


0.5 

2.3 

1.8 

A-Line 

East 


2.3 

2.9 

0.6 

A-Line/18 ,h Avenue a 

North 


2.9 

10.5 

7.6 

A-Line/18 lh Avenue b 

South 


10.5 

12.1 

1.6 

A-Line 

South 


12.1 

79.8 

67.7 

A-Line c 

West 

BEI Lateral 

0.0 

0.3 

0.3 

SoCal Gas Pipelines 

East 


0.3 

0.6 

0.3 

Riviera Drive 

East 

IID Lateral 

0.0 

0.1 

0.1 

Ogilby Road 

West 


0.1 

2.6 

2.5 

SDG&E Powerline d 

North 


2.6 

3.5 

0.9 

Interstate 8 

South 


3.5 

4.4 

0.9 

IID Powerlines 

e 


4.4 

5.1 

0.7 

SDG&E Powerline 

South 


5.1 

5.6 

0.5 

IID Powerlines 

e 


5.6 

6.1 

0.5 

Interstate 8 

West 


6.1 

8.1 

2.0 

Interstate 8 

North 


8.1 

8.5 

0.4 

Evan Hewes Highway 

North 


8.5 

13.6 

5.1 

Evan Hewes Highway 

South 


13.6 

16.2 

2.6 

IID Powerline 

North 


16.2 

26.0 

9.8 

Evan Hewes Highway 

North 


26.0 

27.1 

1.1 

Evan Hewes Highway 

South 


27.1 

27.6 

0.5 

None, new right-of-way 

Not Applicable 1 


27.6 

27.8 

0.2 

None, new right-of-way 

NA 


27.8 

34.9 

7.1 

Hunt Road 

North 


34.9 

35.9 

1.0 

Hunt Road 

South 


35.9 

36.9 

1.0 

Hunt Road 

North 


36.9 

38.7 

1.8 

East Chick Road 

North 


38.7 

38.9 

0.2 

McGrew Road 

East 


38.9 

39.7 

0.8 

Private Field Road 

East 


39.7 

40.4 

0.7 

East Ross Road 

South 


40.4 

41.4 

1.0 

East Ross Road 

North 


41.4 

42.1 

0.7 

Parker Road 

East 


42.1 

42.9 

0.8 

Parker Road 

South 


42.9 

43.4 

0.5 

Holton Road 

South 


43.4 

43.6 

0.2 

State Route 111 and IID 
Powerline 

g 


43.6 

45.7 

2.1 

IID Powerline 

North 


The B-Line would be adjacent to 18 th Avenue along this segment of the route but would not be within the actual road 
or road shoulder. 

The B-Line would be installed within the road or road shoulder of 18 th Avenue along this segment of the route. 

The B-Line would also be adjacent to State Route 78 and Ogilby Road for portions of this pipeline segment. 

The IID Lateral would be installed beneath Interstate 8 and the All-American Canal between MPs 2.3 and 2.6. 

The IID Lateral would be between IID powerlines “A" and “C” in this location. 

The IID Lateral would be installed beneath Interstate 8 in this location. 

The IID Lateral would be between Old State Highway 111 and an IID powerline in this location. 


2-8 





North Baja proposes to generally use a 60-foot-wide construction right-of-way for the BEI 
Lateral. The permanent right-of-way between the Blythe Meter Station and Riviera Drive (MPs 0.0 to 
0.3) would be 30 feet wide. Rights to build and operate the lateral within the Riviera Drive right-of-way 
(MPs 0.3 to 0.6) would be authorized under an agreement between North Baja and the City of Blythe. 
For the purpose of this analysis, a 1-foot-wide permanent right-of-way has been assumed for the portion 
of the BEI Lateral located within Riviera Drive. North Baja’s typical right-of-way cross sections along 
the proposed BEI Lateral are in Appendix C. 

Where the IID Lateral parallels existing powerlines. North Baja proposes to generally use an 80- 
foot-wide construction right-of-way and a 30-foot-wide permanent right-of-way. North Baja proposes to 
use a 60-foot-wide construction right-of-way and a 30-foot-wide permanent right-of-way where the lateral 
would be installed between a powerline and a road. A 60-foot-wide construction right-of-way would also 
be used where the IID Lateral would be installed within or abutting the traveled portion of county roads. 
Rights to build and operate the IID Lateral within county road rights-of-way would be authorized under a 
franchise agreement between North Baja and Imperial County. For the portion of the IID Lateral located 
in Evan Hewes Highway and other county roads, a 2-foot-wide permanent right-of-way has been 
assumed. In some cases, where the road right-of-way has not been expressly dedicated to the county, 
North Baja may acquire additional easement from private landowners. In these areas, a 30-foot-wide 
permanent right-of-way has been assumed. North Baja’s typical right-of-way cross sections along the 
proposed IID Lateral are in Appendix C. 

In addition to the construction right-of-way, North Baja has identified temporary extra 
workspaces that would be required for staging areas and construction at waterbodies, roads, and railroads, 
and in areas of steep slopes and rugged terrain. The approximate locations and sizes of temporary extra 
workspaces identified by North Baja are listed in Table D-l in Appendix D. 

2.2.2 Aboveground Facilities 

Modifications at existing and construction of new aboveground facilities associated with the 
proposed Project would affect 9.7 acres of land. Of the 9.7 acres, 5.4 acres would be permanently 
converted for operation of these facilities. 

The installation of a new pig receiver at the Ehrenberg Compressor Station would take place 
within the existing fenceline of the facility and would not require any additional land for construction or 
operation; however, a header pipe associated with the new pig receiver would be outside of the fenceline 
of the facility and would require 0.7 acre for construction (no permanent right-of-way would be required 
because the line would be installed on North Baja fee property). The aboveground modifications at the 
Ehrenberg Compressor Station and the adjacent El Paso Meter Station to allow for northbound flow of 
gas would occur within the existing fencelines of the facilities. 

North Baja would require about 4.3 acres of land for construction and operation of the proposed 
Blythe Meter Station. In response to concerns raised by a prospective developer of the property, North 
Baja evaluated whether the Blythe Meter Station could be located between the existing A-Line and El 
Paso’s Line 1903. North Baja determined that there is not sufficient space for the meter station between 
these existing lines but adjusted the layout of the proposed facility to minimize the station’s northward 
extension from the A-Line. 

The addition of a pig launcher and receiver at Rannells Trap would require an expansion of the 
facility by 0.3 acre for both construction and operation. The modifications, odorant facility, and 
additional pig launcher and receiver at the Ogilby Meter Station would require an expansion of the facility 
by 0.4 acre for both construction and operation. 


2-9 


Four new valves associated with the B-Line would be collocated with existing valves along the 
A-Line and would require an expansion of the existing 50-foot by 50-foot sites to 75-foot by 150-foot 
sites during construction. No new permanent right-of-way would be required for the new valves, except 
for valve #2 along 18th Avenue. This valve would require a 12-foot by 24-foot expansion of the existing 
fenced site. The other five valves associated with the B-Line would be within the sites of the Ehrenberg 
Compressor Station, Rannells Trap, and Ogilby Meter Station and would not require any additional land 
for construction or operation. 

The tap at the B-Line and pig launcher associated with the IID Lateral would require an 80-foot 
by 100-foot site for construction and operation. The proposed El Centro Meter Station and pig receiver 
would be installed within the existing fenceline of the El Centro Generating Station but would require 2.5 
acres of land for construction and would also require North Baja to obtain a 0.2-acre easement from the 
IID within the generating station yard. One of the four new valves would be collocated with the tap at the 
B-Line and pig launcher. The acreage of disturbance associated with this valve is included in the acreage 
of disturbance associated with the tap and pig launcher. The three remaining valves along the IID Lateral 
would each require 10-foot by 25-foot fenced sites. 

2.2.3 Pipe Storage and Contractor Yards 

To support construction activities, North Baja proposes to use four pipe storage and contractor 
yards on a temporary basis. These yards would temporarily affect about 73.1 acres of land. The sizes and 
locations of the yards identified by North Baja are listed in Table 2.2.3-1. 


TABLE 2.2.3-1 


Pipe Storage and Contractor Yards Associated with the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 

Facility 

Size 

(acres) 

Previously 

Disturbed 

County a 

Section/Township/Range 

18 lh Avenue Contractor Yard 

15.2 

Yes b 

Riverside 

Sec. 18, T7S, R23E 

Ripley Contractor Yard 

30.2 

Yes b 

Riverside 

Sec. 34, T7S, R22E 

Ogilby Contractor Yard 

5.0 

Yes b 

Imperial 

Sec. 23, T16S, R20E 

IID Lateral (El Centro) Contractor Yard 

22.7 

Yes c 

Imperial 

Sec. 38, T15S, R14E 

Total 

73.1 





All of the proposed pipe storage and contractor yards are in California. 

These sites were used for temporary construction purposes during construction of North Baja’s existing A-Line. 

This site is currently an auto parts salvage yard. The site would be temporarily cleared for use for the proposed 
Project. 


2.2.4 Access Roads 

North Baja proposes to use several existing roads for temporary right-of-way access during 
construction. These access roads primarily exist as paved or dirt roads and/or jeep trails that would be 
graded or otherwise improved as needed to move equipment and materials to the construction right-of- 
way. An additional 1,150 feet of new temporary access roads would be required for the Project, of which 
about 265 feet would be retained as permanent access to the proposed Blythe Meter Station, 400 feet 
would be retained as permanent access to the modified Ogilby Meter Station and odorant facility, and 160 
feet would be retained as permanent access to the proposed tap at the B-Line and pig launcher at the 
beginning of the IID Lateral. A permanent access road would also be required to proposed valve #2 at 
MP 7.6 of the IID Lateral, but North Baja would utilize existing roads with some modification and would 
not need to construct a new road. The locations, conditions, lengths, and acres of the proposed access 
roads are listed in Table D-2 in Appendix D. 


2-10 






North Baja has no plans to maintain a permanent road on the right-of-way for operation and 
maintenance of the pipeline facilities. However, North Baja would maintain access to all portions of the 
permanent right-of-way by four-wheel drive vehicles in order to conduct emergency and periodic 
maintenance. In addition. North Baja would use existing access roads for “like-use” activities where 
access is needed for specialized purposes such as water-draw sites adjacent to Palo Verde Irrigation 
District (PVID) or IID canals and drains, or construction inspection adjacent to powerlines. In these 
locations. North Baja would use the roads in a manner similar to their current use. Roads would be used 
by rubber-tired vehicles (water trucks and pickups), pumps on roads (with adequate spill kits and 
containment for refueling), and foot traffic. All locations would be selected so no new ground 
disturbance would be necessary for their use or maintenance. The specific like-use roads would be 
identified by North Baja before the time of required access. 

2.3 CONSTRUCTION PROCEDURES 

The proposed Project would be designed, constructed, tested, and operated in accordance with all 
applicable requirements included in the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) regulations in Title 49 
CFR Part 192, 1 Transportation of Natural and Other Gas by Pipeline: Minimum Federal Safety 
Standards ; and other applicable Federal and State regulations, including U.S. Department of Labor, 
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) requirements. These regulations are intended to 
ensure adequate protection for the public and to prevent natural gas pipeline accidents and failures. 
Among other design standards, Part 192 specifies pipeline material and qualification, minimum design 
requirements, and protection from internal, external, and atmospheric corrosion. 

To reduce construction impacts, North Baja would implement a Project-specific Construction 
Mitigation and Restoration Plan (CM&R Plan) (see Appendix E) that includes the portions of the FERC’s 
Upland Erosion Control, Revegetation, and Maintenance Plan (Plan) and Wetland and Waterbody 
Construction and Mitigation Procedures (Procedures) that are relevant to the Project area. 1 2 North Baja’s 
CM&R Plan also includes Project-specific measures associated with restoration in an arid environment as 
well as biological and cultural resources protection measures. In addition, North Baja would prepare 
Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plans (SWPPPs) as part of its applications to the Arizona Department 
of Environmental Quality and the CRWQCB for Storm Water Construction Permits. 

To avoid or minimize the potential for harmful spills and leaks during construction, North Baja 
has developed a Spill Prevention, Containment, and Control Plan for Hazardous Materials and Wastes 
(SPCC Plan) (see Appendix F). North Baja’s SPCC Plan describes spill prevention practices, procedures 
for emergency preparedness and incident response, and training requirements. 

North Baja has also prepared a Horizontal Directional Drill Plan (HDD Plan) (see Appendix G) 
that describes the horizontal directional drill (HDD) process and how it would be monitored. The HDD 
Plan also describes the agency notification procedures and the corrective action and cleanup procedures 
that would be followed in the event of an inadvertent release of drilling fluid and the abandonment 
procedures that would be followed if it is necessary to abandon the drill hole. 


1 Pipe design regulations for steel pipe are contained in subpart C, Part 192. Section 192.105 contains a design formula for the pipeline’s 
design pressure. Sections 192.107 through 192.115 contain the components of the design formula, including yield strength, wall thickness, 
design factor, longitudinal joint factor, and temperature derating factor, which are adjusted according to the project design conditions, such as 
pipe manufacturing specifications, steel specifications, class location, and operating conditions. Pipeline operating regulations are contained 
in subpart L, Part 192. 

2 The FERC’s Plan and Procedures are a set of construction and mitigation measures that were developed in collaboration with other Federal 
and State agencies and the natural gas pipeline industry to minimize the potential environmental impacts of the construction of pipeline 
projects in general. The Plan can be viewed on the FERC Internet website at http://www.ferc.gov/industries/gas/enviro/uplndctl.pdf . The 
Procedures can be viewed on the FERC Internet website at http://www.ferc.gov/industries/gas/enviro/wetland.pdf . 


2-11 





These plans were used during construction of the A-Line and have been modified to reflect the 
experience gained during its construction. These plans as well as other resource-specific plans (e.g.. 
Traffic Management Plans, Blasting Specifications, Paleontological Resource Mitigation and Monitoring 
Plan, Dust Control Plan, Fire Prevention and Suppression Plan, Site-specific Residential Construction 
Mitigation Plans, and OHV Management Plan) that have been developed for the proposed Project are 
discussed in detail in Section 4. 

2.3.1 General Pipeline Construction Procedures 

This section describes the general procedures proposed by North Baja for the construction of the 
pipeline facilities. Figure 2.3.1-1 shows the typical steps of cross-country pipeline construction. As 
discussed in Section 1.1, North Baja would build the Project in three phases. For Phase I, North Baja 
plans to use one general construction crew “spread” and one or more specialty crews for a total of 
approximately 50 workers. For Phase I-A, North Baja plans to use one general construction spread but 
may use two spread mobilizations to build the cross-country portions and roadways portions. Between 
100 and 150 workers would be used to construct Phase I-A. For Phase II, North Baja plans to use one 
general construction spread to build the cross-country portions and a separate mini-spread to construct the 
roadway portion. In total, the peak workforce for Phase II would consist of 300 to 400 workers. The 
anticipated dates and duration of construction for each phase are described in Section 2.4. 

Standard pipeline construction is composed of specific activities that make up the linear 
construction sequence. These operations collectively include survey and staking of the right-of-way; 
clearing and grading; trenching; pipe stringing, bending, and welding; lowering the pipeline into the 
trench; backfilling the trench; hydrostatic testing; and cleanup and restoration. The procedures North 
Baja would follow to conduct these activities are described below. In addition, North Baja would use 
special construction techniques when constructing across roads, highways, railroads, waterbodies, 
wetlands, residential areas, and sand dunes; when constructing within paved roads; and when blasting 
through rock (see Section 2.3.2). 

Survey and Staking 

Before the start of construction, North Baja would complete land or easement acquisition. North 
Baja would then mark the limits of the approved work area (i.e., the construction right-of-way boundaries 
and temporary extra workspaces) and the pipeline centerline, and flag the location of approved access 
roads. Existing utility lines and other sensitive resources would be located and marked to prevent 
accidental damage during pipeline construction. 

Clearing and Grading 

The construction work area would be cleared and graded (where necessary) to provide a relatively 
level surface for trench excavating equipment and a sufficiently wide workspace for the passage of heavy 
construction equipment. Except along certain washes where dense stands of small trees cannot be 
avoided, North Baja does not anticipate the need to clear trees. In areas where grading is not required, 
vegetation would be cut off at ground level (leaving the root systems intact) and cleared to the edge of the 
work area for subsequent respreading during cleanup and restoration. In areas requiring grading where no 
bedrock is at the surface, approximately 2 to 8 inches of soil across the entire width of the work area 
would be stockpiled for restoration purposes. In agricultural areas, topsoil would be stripped to its actual 
depth up to 2 feet and stockpiled separately from the trench spoil. 


2-12 



2-13 


Figure 2.3.1-1 

North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 

Typical Pipeline Construction Sequence 










Trenching 


The trench would be excavated to a depth sufficient to provide the minimum cover required by 
DOT specifications. Typically, the trench would be sufficiently deep to allow for about 3 feet of cover 
and wide enough to allow for about 4 to 6 feet of stable soils and rock. In sandy soils, the trench could be 
up to 12 feet wide at the top. In agricultural areas, the depth of cover over the pipeline would be 
increased so that the top of the pipe would be 1 foot below expected deep tilling practices. Between MPs 
2.7 and 5.7, the pipeline would be buried with 6 feet of cover to ensure pipeline integrity in the Buttercup 
Campground, which is heavily used for OHV recreation. North Baja would also install the pipeline deep 
enough to maintain at least 1 foot of clearance when crossing beneath existing utilities or irrigation and 
drainage systems. Spoil from the trench would be spread on the working side of the right-of-way and 
worked over by equipment, or temporarily stored in piles next to the trench. The spoil piles would be 
kept separate from the topsoil piles. In areas w here mechanical equipment cannot break up and loosen the 
bedrock, blasting may be required (see Section 2.3.2). 

Generally, excavated rock would be used to backfill the trench to the top of the existing bedrock 
profile. Large rock not suitable for use as backfill material would be either scattered across the work area 
(with the landowner’s permission) or hauled off the right-of-way and disposed of in an area approved by 
the appropriate agency. 

During the scoping process, the BLM and the BOR commented that the U.S. Citizenship and 
Immigration Services (USCIS) Border Patrol may have a concern about the trench being used for illegal 
activities and that the construction contractor would need to coordinate with the Border Patrol. North 
Baja consulted with the Border Patrol about any concerns it may have and the Border Patrol stated that it 
has not identified any concerns about the Project (Whipple 2006). Therefore, North Baja does not 
propose to place restrictions on the length of trench that would be allowed to be open at any one time as a 
measure to prevent illegal activities. North Baja would, however, restrict the length of trench that would 
be allowed to remain open at any one time to 2 miles as a measure to protect the flat-tailed horned lizard 
in designated flat-tailed horned lizard habitat (see Section 4.7.4.4). This designated habitat occurs 
between MPs 75.2 and 79.6 of the B-Line and between MPs 8.0 and 28.0 of the IID Lateral. These 
milepost locations are the portions of the pipeline routes that are closest to the U.S.-Mexico border. 

Pipe Stringing, Bending, and Welding 

Steel pipe would be procured in 60- or 80-foot lengths (also referred to as joints), protected with 
an epoxy coating applied at the factory, and shipped to the pipe storage and contractor yards. The 
individual joints would be transported to the right-of-way by stringing truck and placed along the 
excavated trench in a single, continuous line or “strung.” 

Individual sections of pipe would be bent where necessary to fit the contours of the trench, 
aligned, welded together into long strings, and placed on temporary supports along the edge of the trench. 
Welds would be x-rayed to ensure structural integrity and compliance with the applicable DOT 
regulations. North Baja would conduct x-ray inspection of 100 percent of all welds over 6 inches in 
diameter where possible. Other means of non-destructive inspection would be conducted where x-ray 
inspection is impossible or impractical. Those welds that do not meet established specifications would be 
repaired or removed. Once the welds are approved, the welded joints would be coated with a protective 
coating and the entire pipeline would be visually inspected for any faults, scratches, or other coating 
defects. Any damage or other faults would be repaired before the pipeline is lowered in. 


2-14 


Lowering-in and Backfilling 

Before the pipeline is lowered in, the trench would be dewatered as necessary in accordance with 
applicable permits and cleaned of debris. In areas of rock, padding material such as sand, sandbags, or 
screened soil would be placed in the bottom of the trench. The pipeline would be lowered into the trench, 
and trench breakers would be installed at specified intervals to prevent water movement along the 
pipeline. The trench would then be backfilled using the excavated materials. If the excavated material is 
rocky, the pipeline would be protected with a rock shield to prevent damage to the pipe and pipe coating, 
and/or covered with more suitable fill obtained either from commercial borrow areas or by separating 
suitable material from the existing trench spoil. Topsoil would not be used as padding material. 

Hydrostatic Testing 

After burial, the pipeline would be tested to ensure that the system is capable of withstanding the 
operating pressure for which it was designed. This procedure is called hydrostatic testing and is 
accomplished using pressurized water in the pipeline. The testing would be done in pipeline sections 
according to North Baja’s permits and DOT specifications (Title 49 CFR Part 192). The exact sequence 
and timing of hydrostatic testing would depend on the final schedule for phased construction (see Section 
2.4). 


Water for testing the BEI Lateral and piping within the Ehrenberg Compressor Station and Blythe 
Meter Station (Phase I) would be obtained from an existing irrigation canal adjacent to North Baja’s 
Ehrenberg Compressor Station property or an existing well located on the Ehrenberg Compressor Station 
site. Both sources are hydrologically connected to the Colorado River. As an alternative, the Phase I 
hydrostatic test water would be obtained from the PVID’s D-10 Canal adjacent to the Blythe Meter 
Station site. After testing, the water would be discharged into lined irrigation canals at the compressor 
station site or into the D-10 Canal. 

North Baja would hydrostatically test the IID Lateral (Phase I-A) in sections with water obtained 
from the All-American Canal through an agreement with the IID. The water would be discharged directly 
back into the All-American Canal or into other IID irrigation facilities. 

The B-Line (Phase II) would be tested with water obtained either from the same water sources at 
the Ehrenberg Compressor Station site or directly from the All-American Canal at the location of the 
pipeline crossing. The water would be discharged to the All-American Canal when testing is complete. 

Test water would contact only new pipe and no chemicals would be added. Test water would be 
pumped into the first test section, pressurized to design test pressure (90 to 100 percent of the specified 
minimum yield strength of the pipe being tested), and maintained at that pressure for about 8 hours. If 
leaks are found, the leaks would be repaired, and the section of pipe would be retested until specifications 
are met. After testing, the water would be pumped into the next test section until the entire pipeline is 
tested. When completed, the test water would be filtered and discharged directly back into the canals or 
other irrigation facilities described above. Energy dissipation devices would be employed as necessary to 
minimize channel erosion. To accomplish the testing requirements per DOT and industry standards, the 
testing would be conducted over a 24-hour period. 

Additional discussion of hydrostatic testing, including the specific water volumes that would be 
used, is included in Section 4.3.3.4. The applicable permits are listed in Table 1.6-1. 


2-15 


Cleanup and Restoration 

Within 20 days of backfilling the trench (10 days in residential areas), all work areas would be 
final graded and restored to preconstruction contours and natural drainage patterns as closely as possible. 
Slopes, such as those found east of SR 78, would be reestablished as near as practicable to 
preconstruction contours. To minimize future settling, the trench would be compacted with construction 
equipment. Topsoil and subsoil would be tested for compaction at regular intervals in agricultural and 
residential areas disturbed by construction activities. Severely compacted agricultural areas would be 
plowed with a paraplow or other deep tillage implement, and appropriate soil compaction mitigation 
would be conducted in severely compacted residential areas. 

North Baja states that compaction testing conducted in native desert habitats after construction of 
the A-Line indicated that the soils crossed by the A-Line did not compact; therefore, North Baja does not 
propose to test for soil compaction in native desert habitats after construction of the B-Line. North Baja 
proposes to conduct soil testing for compaction only in fine-textured soils along the IID Lateral in native 
desert habitats. The BLM commented, however, that there are some dead or dying trees at the edge of the 
construction work area for the A-Line that it believes may be a result of soil compaction that occurred 
during construction of the A-Line. The Agency Staffs have recommended in Section 4.2.3 that North 
Baja consult with the BLM to identify areas where compaction may have occurred during construction of 
the A-Line and revise its CM&R Plan to list these locations, incorporate provisions for limited testing for 
compaction along the B-Line and the IID Lateral, and describe specific measures to alleviate compaction 
if compaction is identified. Additional discussion of soil compaction and mitigation is presented in 
Section 4.2.3 and in the CM&R Plan in Appendix E. Surplus construction material and debris would be 
removed and disposed of at commercial landfills. Access roads would be regraded and restored to 
original condition unless the landowner requests otherwise. 

North Baja would conduct restoration activities in accordance with its CM&R Plan (see 
Appendix E). The native vegetation that had been removed during clearing and windrowed along the 
right-of-way would be respread over the disturbed areas. Areas of soil disturbance would be imprinted 
with a “sheep’s-foot” roller or other methods to provide micro-catchment areas for seed retention and 
improve water infiltration. North Baja would replant large intact vegetation specimens at specified 
locations along the right-of-way to provide a visual barrier to deter OHV traffic on the right-of-way. 
Additional discussion of restoration activities is presented in Section 4.5.3. 

After completion of construction and hydrostatic testing, the pipeline would be cleaned and dried 
using internal tools (pigs) that are propelled through the pipeline. Once cleaned, dried, and purged of air, 
the pipeline would be packed with natural gas. Pipeline markers and/or warning signs would be installed 
along the pipeline centerline at intervals to identify the location of the pipe. 

2.3.2 Special Construction Techniques 

Construction across roads, highways, railroads, waterbodies, wetlands, residential areas, and sand 
dunes; construction within paved roads; and blasting through rock may require special construction 
techniques. These are briefly described below. Applicable permits are listed in Table 1.6-1. 

Road, Highway, and Railroad Crossings 

Construction across paved and unpaved roads, highways, and railroads would be in accordance 
with requirements of applicable road and railroad crossing permits and approvals. These features would 
either be bored or open cut. Boring requires the excavation of pits on both sides of the feature to be 
crossed to the depth of the pipeline, the installation of boring equipment, and the boring of a hole under 
the road equal to the diameter of the pipe. The uncased pipe section would then be pushed through the 


2-16 


borehole. For long crossings, additional pipe sections may be required. These additional sections usually 
would be welded to the first section of pipe in the bore pit before being pushed through the borehole. In 
some cases, 24-hour operations are required during difficult boring operations when ground conditions 
and ambient daytime temperatures could cause overheating of the equipment or heat injury to operators. 

North Baja would design all railroad crossings in accordance with the American Railway 
Engineering and Maintenance of Way Association’s (AREMA) Manual for Railway Engineering, Part 5 
Pipeline and Title 49 CFR Part 192 Transportation of Natural Gas by Pipeline: Minimum Federal Safety 
Standards. The AREMA specifications require a minimum distance of 10 feet from the bottom of the rail 
to the top of the pipe. All road crossings would be designed to comply with Title 49 CFR Part 192 
Transportation of Natural Gas by Pipeline: Minimum Federal Safety Standards, which specifies a 
minimum depth of cover of 3 feet in road ditches. In addition, all roadway and highway crossings would 
be designed to meet the applicable State and local agency permit requirements and the latest edition of 
American Petroleum Institute 1102 requirements. 

For open-cut road crossings, North Baja would prepare construction specifications that are 
designed to avoid settling of the finished grade but would require the contractor to repair any settling, 
should it occur. Where Federal land management agencies or local agencies having jurisdiction over the 
roads include related specifications in their permits, those too would be incorporated into the construction 
contractor’s requirements. Finally, if road settlement attributed to pipeline construction occurs after the 
pipeline is in operation, North Baja would make the necessary repairs as required by the jurisdictional 
agency. 


There would be little or no disruption to traffic at road or railroad crossings that are bored. North 
Baja would take measures at open-cut crossings to ensure safety and minimize traffic disruptions. No 
roads would be closed unless adequate detours are provided. North Baja has developed a Traffic 
Management Plan for 18th Avenue and roadways in Imperial County where the pipe would be installed 
longitudinally in the roadway. This plan details the specific measures that would be used to control traffic 
during construction in these areas (see Section 4.10.2 and Appendix H). 

Waterbody and Wetland Crossings 

The proposed Project would cross 2 perennial waterbodies, 70 man-made irrigation canals and 
drains, and 265 3 desert washes. Only one waterbody, the Colorado River, has a fisheries classification 
(warmwater). The waterbody crossings would be constructed in accordance with Federal, State, and local 
permits (see Table 1.6-1). 

North Baja proposes to cross one of the perennial waterbodies (the Colorado River) and two of 
the canals (the All-American Canal [three times] and the East Highline Canal [once]) using the HDD 
method. This technique involves drilling a pilot hole under the waterbody and banks, then enlarging that 
hole through successive reamings until the hole is large enough to accommodate the pipe. Throughout 
the process of drilling and enlarging the hole, a slurry made of naturally occurring non-toxic materials, 
such as bentonite clay and water, would be circulated through the drilling tools to lubricate the drill bit, 
remove drill cuttings, and hold the hole open. This slurry is referred to as drilling mud. Pipe sections 
long enough to span the entire crossing would be staged and welded along the construction work area on 
the opposite side of the waterbody and then pulled through the drilled hole. At the Colorado River, the 
pipeline would be installed about 60 feet below the riverbed. In response to comments received during 
the scoping process. North Baja relocated the proposed alignment of the Colorado River crossing to be 


3 The EIS/EIR for the original North Baja Pipeline Project reported that 579 desert washes would be crossed by the A-Line. During the survey 
for the A-Line, North Baja counted washes less than 6 inches wide. In 2005, North Baja conducted a survey of the proposed B-Line route 
and counted only washes that had a defined bed and bank and an ordinary high water mark to be more consistent with terminology used by 
the CDFG and the COE. The majority of the washes counted in 2005 were at least 24 inches wide. 


2-17 



south of the existing A-Line and between the A-Line and El Paso’s Line 1903. At the All-American and 
East Highline Canals, the pipeline would be installed about 30 feet below the canal beds. The HDD at 
each location is anticipated to take 4 to 6 weeks. Figure 2.3.2-1 shows a conceptual HDD waterbody 
crossing. 


The potential for an inadvertent release of drilling mud (also referred to as a frac-out) is 
generally greatest during drilling of the pilot hole when the pressurized drilling mud is seeking the path of 
least resistance. The path of least resistance is typically back along the path of the drilled pilot hole. 
However, if the drill path becomes temporarily blocked or encounters other areas such as large fractures 
or fissures that lead to the ground surface or waterbody, an inadvertent release could occur. North Baja 
would monitor the pipeline route and the circulation of drilling mud throughout drilling for indications of 
an inadvertent release and would immediately implement corrective actions if a release is observed or 
suspected to be occurring. The corrective actions North Baja would implement are outlined in its HDD 
Plan (see Appendix G). 

The second perennial waterbody, the Alamo River, would be crossed by the IID Lateral. North 
Baja proposes to cross the Alamo River by installing the pipeline in the road shoulder over the culverts 
that carry the water under Hunt Road. 

The B-Line would cross 31 canals and drains, most of which are operated and maintained by the 
PVID. The majority of the canals and drains cross roadways through culverts designed to be 1 foot below 
future winter water elevation. The pipeline would be bored under these culverts using techniques similar 
to road bores described above, or installed between the drain culverts and the road (see Figure 2.3.2-2). A 
minimum of 2 feet would be maintained under canals and 5 feet over drains. 

Although plans are not finalized, North Baja expects to cross the 39 drains and canals that would 
be crossed by the IID Lateral using methods similar to those used to install the B-Line. Most of the drains 
and canals that would be crossed are operated and maintained by the IID. North Baja plans to develop 
construction techniques in conjunction with the IID that would provide adequate separation and 
protection for the facilities and future maintenance activities of both parties while minimizing 
construction impacts. The IID Lateral would also cross two canals (MP 13) planned by the BOR as part 
of the Drop 2 Reservoir Project. The Drop 2 Reservoir Project is discussed in Section 4.15. In each case, 
the IID Lateral would be designed such that the canals can be installed above the pipeline. 

Rannells Drain, which would be crossed by the B-Line, is the only canal or drain that would be 
crossed using the conventional open-cut crossing technique (see Figure 2.3.2-3). Rannells Drain is an 
agricultural drain in the Palo Verde Valley that is periodically cleared of vegetation by the PVID. Pipe 
segments for the crossing would be fabricated adjacent to the drain. Backhoes generally operating from 
one or both banks would excavate the trench within the streambed while water continues to flow across 
the construction work area. Sediment booms would be installed downstream of the trenching to restrict 
sedimentation to the localized area. Trench plugs (stacked, compacted sand bags) would be left in place 
to prevent the flow of water into the upland portions of the trench. Trench spoil excavated from the 
streambed would be generally placed at least 10 feet away from the water’s edge. Sediment barriers 
would be installed where necessary to control sediments and prevent excavated spoil from entering the 
water. After the trench is dug, the prefabricated pipeline segment would be carried, pushed, or pulled 
across Rannells Drain and positioned in the trench. The pipeline would be installed approximately 25 feet 
from the A-Line with 5 feet of cover. The trench would then be backfilled with native material or with 
imported material if required by applicable permits. Following backfilling, the banks would be restored 
and stabilized. In accordance with the CM&R Plan, North Baja would attempt to complete actual in- 
stream trenching within 72 hours. 


2-18 



Figure 2.3.2-1 

North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 

Conceptual Horizontal Directional Drill 
Waterbody Crossing 


2-19 
































2-20 












































TOP OF TOP OF 



NOTES: 

1. DEPTH TO BE A MINIMUM OF 5-0” AS SPECIFIED IN THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS 
OR AS DIRECTED BY COMPANY. 

2. PIPE SHALL BE LEVEL UNDER STREAM/DITCH CHANNEL AT DEPTH SHOWN EXCEPT 
WHERE NOTED OTHERWISE. 

3. CONCRETE COATING, BOLT-ON CONCRETE WEIGHTS, SET-ON CONCRETE WEIGHTS 
OR ANCHORS WILL BE INSTALLED AS SPECIFIED IN THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS 
OR AS DIRECTED BY COMPANY. 


Figure 2.3.2-3 

North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 

Typical Open-Cut Drain Crossing 


2-21 





















The proposed Project would also cross approximately 265 desert (dry) washes. All of these 
washes would be crossed by the B-Line. North Baja proposes to use conventional cross-country 
construction techniques to cross these desert washes. North Baja states that it would manage spoil piles 
in accordance with the provisions of the CDFG’s Streambed Alteration Agreement (SAA). For the A- 
Line, these provisions required that materials placed in seasonally dry portions of a stream that could be 
washed downstream or could be deleterious to aquatic life must be removed before inundation by high 
flows. Dry washes are also regulated by the CRWQCB, which may impose additional stipulations 
regarding spoil pile management such as requiring North Baja to leave gaps in the spoil piles in dry 
washes so the washes remain open during construction. In accordance with its CM&R Plan (see 
Appendix E), North Baja would prepare and submit an updated CM&R Plan to the Agency Staffs before 
construction if necessary to incorporate any additional requirements of Federal, State, and local permits. 
The depth of cover over the pipeline would range from 3 to 5 feet. In instances where the pipeline would 
run laterally within a wash, concrete coating would be added to the pipe to provide additional protection 
and negative buoyancy. 

The Project would cross 18 wetlands under the jurisdiction of the COE. Thirteen wetlands would 
occur along the B-Line and 5 wetlands would occur along the IID Lateral. Eight of the 18 wetlands 
would be left undisturbed by use of the HDD method, bore method, or by installing the pipeline in the 
road shoulder outside the wetland boundary. North Baja would open cut the remaining 10 wetlands 
implementing the construction and restoration procedures outlined in its CM&R Plan (see Appendix E). 
The pipeline would be installed with a minimum depth of cover of 3 feet in these 10 wetlands. 

Sections 4.3.2 and 4.4 provide additional discussion of waterbodies and wetlands crossed by the 
Project and include an analysis of North Baja’s crossing plans. 

Residential Areas 

There are 54 residences and 8 businesses along the proposed construction work area. Of these, 39 
residences and 6 businesses are within 100 feet of the proposed construction work area (18 residences and 
2 businesses along the B-Line, 2 residences along the BEI Lateral, and 19 residences and 4 businesses 
along the IID Lateral). All of the residences and businesses adjacent to the B-Line are along 18 th Avenue 
in Riverside County. North Baja proposes to construct the B-Line within the road or road shoulder of 18 th 
Avenue between MPs 2.9 and 10.5. In the area along the BEI Lateral where the two residences are 
located, the pipeline would be installed within Riviera Drive. North Baja proposes to install the IID 
Lateral within several Imperial County roadways (see Table 2.2.1-1). The residences and businesses 
adjacent to the IID Lateral are located along these various roadways. 

North Baja would seek encroachment permits from Riverside and Imperial Counties. 
Preconstruction activities would include preliminary examination of the work areas and identification of 
the exact location of subsurface utilities, either through visual inspection or by digging potholes at 
intervals along the pipeline trench. If potholing identifies a conflict between existing utilities and the 
pipeline centerline, the centerline would be horizontally and/or vertically realigned to eliminate the 
conflict. 


In general, construction in the 7.6-mile-long paved segment of 18 th Avenue in Riverside County 
and in the various Imperial County roadways would be accomplished using urban construction 
techniques. All construction activities would be confined to the width of the roadways, including the 
paved roadway and road shoulders. Excavated materials would be used as a temporary road base for 
construction traffic to reduce wear on the existing road surface. Through traffic would be routed around 
segments of road where construction is active; however, North Baja would maintain access for residents, 
farm workers, and emergency response vehicles throughout the period of construction (estimated to be 


2-22 


about 2 weeks in any given location). North Baja has developed Traffic Management Plans for 18 th 
Avenue and Imperial County Roads (see Section 4.10.2 and Appendix H). 

During construction, the edge of the construction work area within 100 feet of residences would 
be fenced. The fencing would extend 100 feet on either side of the residences. During non-working 
hours, the trench would be covered with steel plates where necessary to allow traffic passage and reduce 
safety hazards. The construction areas would also be patrolled during non-work hours to minimize safety 
issues associated with open trenches. Equipment would be maintained in good operating condition to 
minimize noise, and dust generated by construction activities would be controlled with the use of water 
trucks and regular spraying. 

After the pipeline has been installed, the trench would be backfilled and compacted, and the road 
surface graded, restored to original contours, and paved. The pipeline would be installed with a minimum 
of 3 feet of cover and with a minimum of 1 foot of vertical separation from other utilities, or as otherwise 
required. 

In addition to these general measures. North Baja has prepared site-specific residential 
construction mitigation plans that detail the specific measures that would be used when construction 
occurs near residences. These site-specific plans are discussed in detail in Section 4.8.3. 

Sand Dunes 

The alignment of the proposed IID Lateral crosses sand areas across the ISDRA between MPs 0.0 
and 7.9, but avoids the higher relief sand hills that constitute the dunes proper. Consequently, North Baja 
proposes to use conventional pipeline construction techniques in this area, with the exception of HDDs on 
either end of the route through the ISDRA. Although the ditch would be deeper and wider than normal, 
(i.e., 6 feet of cover in the high-use OHV areas between MPs 2.7 and 5.7), the 80-foot-wide construction 
right-of-way is expected to be sufficient for the trench, spoil storage, and workspace. No separation of 
surficial soil is proposed through the ISDRA. 

Although the construction is proposed during the off-peak recreational use season, North Baja 
would work with the BLM to develop appropriate communication methods for the public who may use 
the recreational area during this time. North Baja would post signs, erect exclusion fencing, and, if 
deemed necessary, provide security to ensure the safety of the public during construction through this 
area. 

Blasting 

During construction of the A-Line, blasting was necessary only at MP 28.9. Therefore, blasting 
to excavate the trench for the B-Line is not anticipated to be widespread and would be only likely to occur 
in the same area as the A-Line construction. There are no structures near this milepost location. 
Conditions along the IID Lateral are generally flat or hilly with no known locations of near surface rock 
that would require blasting. Should blasting be necessary, pre- and post-blasting inspections would be 
conducted at all residential or commercial structures or utilities within 150 feet of blasting, with the 
landowner’s approval. All blasting activities would be conducted only during daylight hours and in strict 
compliance with North Baja’s construction specifications for blasting (see Appendix I). These 
specifications contain procedures for complying with applicable Federal, State, and local safety and 
environmental regulations, codes, and standards for the use, storage, and transport of explosives. 


2-23 


2.3.3 Aboveground Facility Construction Procedures 

The proposed Blythe and El Centro Meter Stations would be on flat ground, and site clearing and 
grading to establish level areas for facility construction would be minimal. North Baja proposes to fence 
both areas for security. The nine proposed B-Line valves would be installed adjacent to the nine existing 
A-Line valves, and the four proposed IID valves would be installed at intervals specified by DOT 
regulations and in areas easily accessible to maintenance personnel. Valve assemblies would be fenced to 
protect them from damage or vandalism. 

North Baja would maintain fences around its valve sites, taps, pig launchers and receivers, meter 
stations, and the Ehrenberg Compressor Station. These facilities would be graveled to facilitate vehicle 
and equipment operation within the facilities. Solar panels would be installed at the new valve sites for 
power needs. Power for the Blythe Meter Station would be supplied by an existing distribution line along 
Riviera Drive. The Blythe Meter Station would require a 265-foot-long permanent access road from 
Riviera Drive. A 400-foot-long permanent access road would be required for the modified Ogilby Meter 
Station and odorant facility, and a 160-foot-long permanent access road would be required for the 
proposed tap at the B-Line and pig launcher at the beginning of the IID Lateral. A permanent access road 
would also be required to proposed valve #2 at MP 7.6 of the IID Lateral, but North Baja would utilize 
existing roads with some modification and would not need to construct a new road. The El Centro Meter 
Station would utilize power available at the El Centro Generating Station; no new access road would be 
necessary for this facility, which would lie within the yard of the station. 

2.4 CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE 

As discussed in Section 1.1, the proposed Project would be constructed in three phases. Phase I 
would involve the modifications at the Ehrenberg Compressor Station, the El Paso Meter Station at the 
Ehrenberg Compressor Station site, and the Ogilby Meter Station. Phase I would also involve 
construction of the Blythe Meter Station, the SoCal Gas Interconnect, the BEI Lateral, and the odorant 
facility at the Ogilby Meter Station. Construction of Phase I is expected to take 2 months and would 
occur in 2007. 

Phase I-A would involve the construction of the IID Lateral, including the tap, pig launcher and 
receiver, valves, and El Centro Meter Station. Phase I-A would also include one of the HDDs of the All- 
American Canal and the HDD of the Eastline Canal. North Baja estimates that Phase I-A would be 
constructed between mid-June and mid-September of 2008 between MPs 0.0 and 13.7, which includes the 
crossing of the dunes. The remaining 32 miles would be constructed in the latter part of 2008, likely 
extending into early 2009. Construction is expected to take approximately 2 to 3 months in the dunes and 
3 to 4 months for the remaining area. Construction may take place as one or two mobilizations. 

Phase II would involve the construction of the B-Line, including the valves along the pipeline 
route and the pig launcher and receiver at the Ogilby Meter Station. Phase II would also include the other 
HDD of the All-American Canal. North Baja plans to construct Phase II in the latter part of 2009, and 
expects that construction activities would last 4 to 6 months. 

Additional details of North Baja’s construction plans and workforce are provided in Section 4.9.2. 

2.5 ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE INSPECTION AND MITIGATION MONITORING 

As the lead Federal agency for the Project, the FERC may impose conditions on any Certificate 
granted for the Project. These conditions could include additional requirements and mitigation measures 
identified in this EIS/EIR to minimize the environmental impact that would result from the construction 


2-24 


of the Project (see Sections 4.0 and 5.0). The FERC staff will recommend to its Commission that these 
additional requirements and mitigation measures (offset with bold type in the text) be included as specific 
conditions to any approving Certificate issued for North Baja’s Project. If it approves the Project, the 
FERC will require North Baja to implement the construction procedures and mitigation measures that 
North Baja has proposed as part of the Project unless specifically modified by other Certificate 
conditions. 

As the California State lead agency, the CSLC would adopt a mitigation monitoring program 
(MMP) for the Project pursuant to the CEQA. In accordance with the Mineral Leasing Act, the BLM 
would require North Baja to furnish a bond, or other security, to ensure that North Baja would comply 
with the terms and conditions of the BLM’s Right-of-Way Grant. The environmental inspection and 
MMP for the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project would address requirements placed on the Project by 
the FERC, the CSLC, the BLM, and other applicable agencies. Full-time third-party Compliance 
Monitors representing the FERC, the CSLC, and the BLM would be present on each construction spread 
to monitor compliance with Project mitigation measures and requirements. Other Federal and State 
agencies would conduct oversight of inspection and monitoring to the extent determined necessary by the 
individual agency. 

To ensure that construction of the proposed facilities would comply with mitigation measures 
identified in North Baja’s applications, the FERC Certificate, the CSLC’s MMP, the BLM’s Plan of 
Development, and other permits, North Baja would include in its construction work scope and 
specifications all relevant environmental-related requirements known at the time of execution of the 
construction contracts. North Baja would incorporate relevant requirements identified after execution of 
construction contracts via change orders or other contractual mechanisms. In this manner, compliance 
with the terms of the construction contract would ensure compliance with the applicable environmental 
requirements. Contractors would receive and be required to comply with relevant permits, mitigation 
plans, North Baja’s CM&R Plan, and a Construction Drawing Package containing pipeline, plant, and 
equipment drawings designated as being approved for construction. 

North Baja would employ a tracking system based on the system developed during construction 
of the A-Line to ensure that relevant preconstruction surveys/clearances are completed before releasing 
the construction contractor(s) to begin construction activities. For purposes of quality assurance and 
compliance with mitigation measures, other applicable regulatory requirements, and Project 
specifications, North Baja would be represented on each pipeline spread by a Chief Inspector. The Chief 
Inspector would be assisted by one or more craft inspectors, and at least two Environmental Inspectors 
(Els). North Baja’s Els would have access to the relevant compliance specifications and other documents 
contained in the construction contract(s). At a minimum, the Els would be responsible for: 

• ensuring compliance with the requirements of the CM&R Plan, the environmental 
conditions of the FERC Certificate, the mitigation measures proposed by North Baja in 
its application submitted to the FERC, other environmental permits and approvals, and 
environmental requirements in private landowner easement agreements; 

• identifying, documenting, and overseeing corrective actions, as necessary to bring an 
activity back into compliance; 

• verifying that the limits of authorized construction work areas and locations of access 
roads are properly marked before clearing; 


2-25 


• verifying the location of signs and highly visible flagging marking the boundaries of 
sensitive resource areas, waterbodies, wetlands, or areas with special requirements along 
the construction work area; 

• identifying erosion/sediment control and soil stabilization needs in all areas; 

• locating dewatering structures and slope breakers to ensure they will not direct water into 
known cultural resources sites or locations of sensitive species; 

• verifying that trench dewatering activities do not result in the deposition of sand, silt, 
and/or sediment near the point of discharge into a wetland or waterbody or cause 
scouring as a result of excessive water volumes and/or pump velocities. If such 
deposition or scouring is occurring, the dewatering activity would be stopped and the 
design of the discharge would be changed to prevent recurrence of the relevant problem; 

• testing subsoil and topsoil in agricultural and residential areas to measure compaction and 
determine the need for corrective action; 

• advising the Chief Inspector when conditions (such as wet weather) make it advisable to 
restrict construction activities in agricultural areas; 

• ensuring restoration of contours and topsoil; 

• verifying that the soils imported for agricultural or residential use have been certified as 
free of noxious weeds and soil pests; 

• determining the need for and ensuring that temporary erosion controls are properly 
installed as necessary to prevent sediment flow into Rannells Drain and/or as required by 
regulatory agencies; 

• inspecting and ensuring the maintenance of temporary erosion control measures at 
Rannells Drain at least: 

o on a daily basis in areas of active construction or equipment operation; 

o on a weekly basis in areas with no construction or equipment operation; and 

o within 24 hours of each 0.5 inch of rainfall; 

• ensuring the repair of all ineffective temporary erosion control measures at Rannells 
Drain within 24 hours of identification; 

• keeping records of compliance with the environmental conditions of the FERC 
Certificate, and the mitigation measures proposed by North Baja in the application 
submitted to the FERC and other Federal and State environmental permits during active 
construction and restoration; and 

• identifying areas that should be given special attention to ensure stabilization and 
restoration after the construction phase. Implementation of this program may be 
transferred to the company's operating section upon completion of construction and 
restoration activities. 


2-26 


The Els would have authority to stop work or require other corrective action to achieve 
environmental compliance. In addition to monitoring compliance, the Els’ duties would include training 
Project personnel and reporting compliance status to the contractor(s); North Baja; FERC, CSLC, and 
BLM staff; and other agencies as required. In addition to North Baja’s Els, specialized biological, 
paleontological, and cultural resource monitors would be employed on each construction spread where 
appropriate and as required. 

North Baja would develop an environmental training program based on the program used during 
construction of the A-Line and tailored to the proposed Project and its requirements. The program would 
be designed to ensure that: (1) qualified environmental training personnel provide thorough and well- 
focused training sessions regarding the environmental requirements applicable to the trainees’ activities; 
(2) all individuals receive environmental training before they begin work on the right-of-way; (3) 
adequate training records are kept; and (4) refresher training is provided as needed to maintain high 
awareness of environmental requirements. 

During construction, full-time third-party Compliance Monitors representing the FERC, the 
CSLC, and the BLM as discussed above would be present on each construction spread to conduct daily 
ongoing inspections of construction activities and mitigation measures and provide regular feedback on 
compliance issues to the FERC, the CSLC, the BLM, North Baja, and North Baja’s environmental 
inspection team. Construction progress and environmental compliance would be tracked and documented 
by the Compliance Monitors in daily reports. The Compliance Monitors would report directly to a 
Compliance Manager who would report directly to the FERC, CSLC, and BLM Project Managers. 

Other objectives of the MMP would be to: 

• facilitate the timely resolution of compliance-related issues in the field; 

• provide continuous information to the FERC, the CSLC, the BLM, and other agencies 
regarding noncompliance issues and their resolution; and 

• review, process, and track construction-related variance requests. 

It is expected that these variance requests would be necessary because during construction, 
unforeseen or unavoidable site conditions can result in the need for changes from approved mitigation 
measures and construction procedures. Additionally, the need for route realignments, extra workspaces, 
or access roads outside of the previously approved construction work area may arise. Changes to 
previously approved mitigation measures, construction procedures, and construction work areas would 
require some level of regulatory approval and would be handled in the form of variance requests to be 
submitted by North Baja and reviewed and approved or denied by the agencies with the delegation of 
some authority to the third-party Compliance Monitors. 

After construction, North Baja would conduct follow-up inspections of all agricultural areas after 
the first and second growing seasons to determine the success of restoration. Restoration would be 
considered successful in agricultural areas if crop yields are similar to adjacent undisturbed portions of 
the same field. During this period. North Baja would submit quarterly reports to the FERC and the CSLC 
that document any problems identified by North Baja or landowners and describe the corrective actions 
taken to remedy those problems. 

North Baja would also monitor the entire pipeline route to determine the success of restoration of 
desert vegetation. In native desert habitats, restoration would be considered successful if the right-of-way 
is similar in species composition to adjacent undisturbed lands. This post-construction monitoring would 


2-27 


be conducted annually in areas of desert vegetation disturbed by construction through 2012. Results of 
the monitoring would be provided in reports to the FERC, the BLM, the CSLC, and the CDFG. 

Additionally, North Baja would conduct surveys for non-native invasive plant species. The 
results would be compared to the preconstruction survey conducted to determine locations of weed 
infestations attributable to the Project. North Baja would be responsible for weed survey and control two 
times a year for 2 years, then once a year thereafter as part of its routine operation and maintenance of the 
pipelines. 

After construction, the lead, cooperating, and/or other agencies would continue to conduct 
oversight inspection and monitoring. If it is determined that any of the proposed monitoring time frames 
are not adequate to assess the success of restoration, North Baja would be required to extend its post¬ 
construction monitoring programs. The BLM would retain North Baja’s bond or other security until the 
BLM is satisfied with North Baja’s reclamation efforts. 

2.6 OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, AND SAFETY CONTROLS 

North Baja currently operates and maintains the A-Line in accordance with all applicable Federal 
and State regulations. The existing pipeline system is monitored and controlled 24 hours a day for 
pressure drops in the pipeline that could indicate a leak or other operating problem by full-time staff at the 
North Baja/Gas Transmission Northwest Gas Control Center in Portland, Oregon. North Baja’s round- 
the-clock monitoring of the pipeline system is accomplished principally through a Supervisory Control 
and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system, which is a computer system for gathering and analyzing real¬ 
time systems. The SCADA system gathers information from locations along the pipeline, such as 
compressor stations, meter stations, or mainline valves, transfers the information back to a central site, 
compares collected data to pre-set safe operating data points, and organizes and displays the data 
including alarm displays for actual operating points that do not meet pre-set operating criteria. 

The system is programmed to take appropriate immediate action when alarm conditions are 
present. These actions include unilateral control or shutdown functions without operator influence in 
some cases, and delayed control or shutdown functions in other cases to allow operator influence. The 
SCADA system allows operators located in the Gas Control Center in Portland to monitor pipeline system 
conditions, including any actions that the SCADA system has made or any conditions that require 
immediate operator actions such as shutting down a compressor unit, closing a valve, or initiating 
emergency call-out action. Procedures are currently in place to staff call centers immediately in 
Spokane, Washington, or TransCanada’s corporate headquarters in Calgary, Alberta, in the event of a 
catastrophic condition. The call center in Spokane is currently in the process of being changed to 
Redmond, Oregon. By the time the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project would be in operation, the 
Redmond center would likely be operational. 

In addition, a crew that conducts on-site operations and maintenance is located at the Ehrenberg 
Compressor Station, and is on call 24 hours a day. When completed, the B-Line, BEI Lateral, and IID 
Lateral would be operated in conjunction with the existing system and subject to the same operation and 
maintenance procedures. 

The pipeline facilities would be clearly marked at line-of-sight intervals and at other key points to 
indicate the presence of the pipeline. The pipeline system would be routinely inspected by air and on the 
ground to observe right-of-way conditions and monitor for encroachments, third-party activities, or 
erosion on or near the right-of-way. All inspections would be conducted in accordance with DOT 
standards. Erosion or unstable conditions would be repaired as appropriate. Appurtenant facilities would 
be maintained on a regular basis. 


2-28 


North Baja would continue to implement environmental protection programs during operation of 
the expanded facilities. Those relevant to the proposed facilities include an environmental awareness 
program regarding desert tortoises. As discussed in Sections 2.5 and 4.5.5, North Baja also implements 
an ongoing weed monitoring program, targeted at eliminating invasive weeds caused by pipeline-related 
factors. 


Section 4.14 presents a more detailed discussion of North Baja’s operation and maintenance 
procedures and safety controls for the proposed Project, including the corrosion protection and detection 
systems, pipe wall classifications, and emergency response procedures. 

2.7 FUTURE PLANS AND ABANDONMENT 

North Baja has not identified plans for additional future expansion of its system beyond the 
phases of expansion discussed in this EIS/EIR or plans for abandonment of the Project facilities. Properly 
maintained, and assuming adequate gas supplies and markets, the proposed system expansion could 
operate for 50 or more years. If and when North Baja abandons any of the proposed facilities, the 
abandonment would be subject to separate approvals by the FERC, the CSLC, and the BLM. The FERC 
review would be conducted under section 7(b) of the NGA. The CSLC review would be conducted under 
the CEQA. For the Federal lands involved, the BLM would require North Baja to submit an 
abandonment plan that would be reviewed by the BLM and the other affected Federal land management 
agencies (e.g., the BOR and the FWS [Cibola NWR]). The BLM would be responsible for approving the 
plan after receipt of concurrence from the other affected Federal land management agencies. 

The FERC typically allows a buried pipeline that has reached the end of its service life to be 
abandoned in place when it has been internally cleaned, purged free of gas, isolated from interconnections 
with other pipelines, and sealed without removing the pipe from the trench. The FERC believes that this 
approach generally minimizes surface disturbance and other potential environmental impact. The 
aboveground pipeline at compressor and meter stations would be completely removed, including all 
related aboveground equipment and foundations, and the station sites would be restored to as near original 
condition as possible. The CSLC’s policy is to require complete removal of abandoned facilities unless it 
can be demonstrated that there would be more long-term impacts from removal than abandonment. 
Disposition of the North Baja facilities on Federal lands would depend on decisions made in the 
abandonment plan discussed above. 

Upon abandonment of the pipeline, in part or in whole, the rights-of-way associated with the 
abandoned facilities would normally be returned to the landowners/land management agencies according 
to the specific easement agreements between the pipeline company and the landowners/land management 
agencies. 


2-29 


























































































































ALTERNATIVES 






3.0 ALTERNATIVES 


3.1 FACTORS USED IN THE SELECTION OF ALTERNATIVES 

3.1.1 Alternatives Development and Screening Process 

One of the most important aspects of the environmental review process is the identification and 
assessment of reasonable alternatives that could potentially avoid or minimize the impacts of a proposed 
project. 


Both the NEPA and the State CEQA Guidelines emphasize the need for an evaluation of a range 
of alternatives. NEPA requires that Federal agencies rigorously explore and objectively evaluate all 
reasonable alternatives to a proposed action in order to provide a clear basis for choice among options by 
the decision-makers and the public (Title 40 CFR Part 15012.14). The State CEQA Guidelines (section 
15126.6[d]) emphasize the selection of a reasonable range of feasible alternatives and adequate 
assessment of these alternatives to allow for a comparative analysis for consideration by decision-makers. 

Consistent with the CEQ and the CEQA requirements and Guidelines, the Agency Staffs 
considered a range of alternatives to the Project or Project location that: (1) could feasibly attain most of 
the basic Project objectives; and (2) would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant impacts of 
the proposed Project. 1 

3.1.2 Alternatives Screening Methodology 

The stated objectives of the proposed Project are described in Section 1.1. The main objectives 
include: (1) providing transportation capacity of up to 2,932,000 Dthd (2,753 MMscfd) of natural gas 
entering the continent at LNG terminals (either planned or under construction) in Baja California to 
delivery points in California and Arizona; (2) delivering up to 120,000 Dthd (113 MMscfd) of natural gas 
to the Blythe Energy Facility I supply pipeline; and (3) providing up to 110,000 Dthd (103 MMscfd) of 
natural gas to the IID. 

Alternatives to the proposed Project were identified and selected based on information from 
North Baja and other sources, and through analyses conducted by the EIS/EIR preparers. The screening 
process that was followed for each alternative consisted of three steps: 

1. Defining alternatives to allow comparative evaluation. 

2. Evaluating each alternative in the context of one or more of the following criteria: 

• the extent to which the alternative would accomplish most of the basic goals and 
objectives of the Project; 

• the extent to which the alternative would avoid or lessen one or more of the 
identified significant environmental impacts of the Project; 


1 The review of alternatives in this EIS/EIR does not include alternatives that cannot be reasonably ascertained or alternatives for which 
potential implementation is remote or speculative because a review of these types of alternatives is not required by Federal and State 
Guidelines. 


3-1 




• the potential feasibility of the alternative, taking into account site suitability, 
economic viability, availability of infrastructure, and consistency with applicable 
plans and regulatory limitations; 

• the appropriateness of the alternative in contributing to a “reasonable range” of 
alternatives necessary to permit a reasoned choice; 

• the requirement of the CEQ and the State CEQA Guidelines to consider a “No 
Project” alternative; 

• and the requirement of the State CEQA Guidelines to identify an 
“Environmentally Superior” alternative (section 15126.6[e]). 

3. Determining the suitability of the proposed alternative for full analysis in the EIS/EIR. If 
the alternative was unsuitable, the Agency Staffs eliminated it, with appropriate 
justification, from further consideration. 

In the final phase of the screening analysis, the environmental advantages and disadvantages of 
the reasonable alternatives were carefully weighed with respect to potential for overall environmental 
advantage, technical feasibility, and consistency with Project and public objectives. The ability of an 
alternative to provide the proposed volumes in the same general time frame as the proposed Project was 
included in this consideration. 

For the screening analysis, the technical and regulatory feasibility of various potential alternatives 
was assessed at a general level. At the screening stage, it is not possible to evaluate potential impacts of 
the alternatives or the proposed Project with absolute certainty. However, it is possible to identify 
elements of the proposed Project that are likely to be the sources of impact. The Agency Staffs’ 
assessment of feasibility was directed toward reverse reason, that is, the Agency Staffs attempted to 
identify anything about the alternative that would be infeasible on technical or regulatory grounds. If 
during the screening analysis an alternative proved to be infeasible or clearly did not provide any 
environmental advantages compared to the proposed Project, it was eliminated from further consideration. 

3.1.3 Summary of Screening Results 

The Agency Staffs reviewed several potential alternatives including the No Project Alternative, 
system alternatives, route alternatives, route variations, alternative delivery points, and aboveground 
facility alternatives using the screening criteria listed above. The Agency Staffs eliminated a number of 
these alternatives because they did not provide any clear environmental advantage. The Agency Staffs 
eliminated other alternatives because they did not meet the stated Project objectives of transporting LNG- 
source gas from LNG terminals in Baja California to U.S. delivery points, specifically to customers in 
southern California and the Southwest. The following sections discuss and analyze each of the 
alternatives evaluated in sufficient detail to explain why they were eliminated from further consideration 
or retained for analysis in Section 4 of this EIS/EIR. 

3.2 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 

3.2.1 No Project Alternative 

The actions triggering this environmental review were North Baja’s applications to the FERC for 
a Certificate and to the CSLC for an amendment to its permit to cross State lands. This environmental 
review will also satisfy the NEPA responsibilities of the BLM in considering North Baja’s application to 


3-2 


amend its existing Right-of-Way Grant and obtain a Temporary Use Permit for the portion of the Project 
on Federal lands, including lands managed by the BOR and the FWS. The FERC, the CSLC, and the 
BLM have two courses of action in considering the proposed Project. They may: (1) deny the respective 
applications; or (2) approve the Project with or without conditions. 

If the Project is denied, none of the potential environmental impacts (both positive and negative) 
identified in this EIS/EIR would occur. However, the objectives of the Project as described in Section 1.1 
would not be met. Specifically, this means that North Baja would not be able to provide transportation 
for LNG-source natural gas from the Mexican pipeline system into the United States to meet the demand 
for natural gas in California and other southwestern U.S. markets. 

To understand the potential effects of the No Project Alternative, it is important to understand the 
source and use of natural gas in California. As discussed in detail in Section 1.1, the State of California is 
the second largest natural gas consumer in the nation. In 2003, Californians consumed about 2.2 trillion 
cubic feet of gas. In-State production of natural gas satisfies only about 13 percent of Statewide demand 
(CEC 2005b). The remaining natural gas that is consumed in the State comes primarily from five major 
out-of-State production basins. 

The demand for natural gas in California, as in the rest of the United States, is expanding, and gas 
producers across North America are struggling to keep pace with the growing demand. Production from 
most of the mature supply basins in North America has declined or only increased modestly since 1990. 
The amount of gas produced per well is also declining, and each well is being drained faster (CEC 
2005a). The result is that domestic natural gas production is not projected to keep up with the growth in 
demand. 

California’s supply of natural gas is also affected by rising demand for natural gas in neighboring 
states. Forty-three new power plants have come online in Arizona since 2001. These plants are 
intermediate load and peaking power plants, which often ramp up quickly to meet changing electricity 
demand. This may take more natural gas from the pipeline system faster than expected. Under normal 
circumstances, this practice is not troublesome if the pipeline system can be balanced by taking gas out of 
storage. In the Phoenix area, however, the nearest storage is hundreds of miles away, and it is becoming 
increasingly common for pipeline pressure to drop during periods of high demand. If the gas pressure 
gets low enough, it could cause curtailments that could affect natural gas delivery into California (CEC 
2005a). 


Although it is speculative to predict the actions that could be taken by other suppliers or users of 
natural gas in the region as well as the resulting effects of those actions if the proposed Project 
applications are denied, southern Californian customers would likely have fewer and potentially more 
expensive options for obtaining natural gas supplies in the near future. This might lead to alternative 
proposals to develop natural gas delivery or storage infrastructure, reduced use of natural gas, and/or the 
use of other hydrocarbon-related sources of energy. 

It is possible that the infrastructure currently supplying natural gas to the proposed market area 
could be developed in other ways unforeseen at this point. This might include constructing or expanding 
regional pipelines as well as LNG import and storage systems. Any construction or expansion work 
would result in specific environmental impacts that could be less than, similar to, or greater than those 
associated with the proposed Project. An analysis of the most reasonably foreseeable natural gas system 
alternatives has been included in Section 3.2. 

Higher natural gas prices is another potential outcome of denying North Baja’s applications. 
Higher natural gas prices could potentially adversely influence the regional economy by reducing realized 


3-3 


household incomes and business profits (Greenspan 2003). Natural gas prices were recently assessed by 
the CEC in its Transmittal of 2005 Energy Report, Range of Need and Policy Recommendations to the 
California Public Utilities Commission (CEC 2005b). The CEC’s report indicates that since the energy 
crisis of 2001, natural gas prices have remained high. The CEC attributes this to global crude oil markets, 
a decreasing rate in finding new natural gas supplies, and events related to weather including Hurricanes 
Katrina and Rita. According to the CEC’s 2005 Integrated Energy Policy Report (CEC 2005a), 
California currently has little influence over national gas market prices. Thus, even when California’s 
own demand is moderate, in-State prices can spike in response to extreme weather conditions in other 
parts of the country. 

According to the CEC, the cost to deliver natural gas to the West Coast via an LNG project could 
be well below the market prices that California pays at its borders. Thus, a potential new supply source 
close to or in California could have the effect of lowering the market price for natural gas in California. 
However, actual prices to consumers will depend upon contracts signed between suppliers and consumers 
or their representatives. 

Denying the applications may also result in the growing reliance on increased energy efficiency 
and renewable energies. Energy efficiency has historically been highly effective as a means to reduce 
demand, and an increase in natural gas efficiency programs could further reduce demand and directly 
benefit customers (CEC 2005a). This conclusion is corroborated by analyses in two reports recently 
issued by the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy (ACEEE). These reports found that 
increased energy efficiency and the installation of renewable energy generation could reduce the demand 
for natural gas and result in lower natural gas prices (Elliot et al. 2003, Elliot and Shipley 2005). 

California in particular has made significant efforts to develop and implement conservation and 
efficiency measures to reduce the use of natural gas and other fossil fuels and has strongly promoted the 
development of renewable energies, which are required to provide 20 percent of the State’s energy needs 
by 2017. One of these programs provides funding for emerging technologies such as photovoltaic (direct 
conversion of sunlight to electricity), solar thermal electric (the conversion of sunlight to heat and its 
concentration and use to power a generator to produce electricity), fuel cell (the conversion of hydrogen 
or hydrogen rich gases into electricity by a direct chemical process), and small wind turbines (small 
electricity-producing, wind-driven generating systems with a rated output of 50 kilowatts or less). 
Another program, the Geothermal Program, promotes the research, development, demonstration, and 
commercialization of California’s enormous earth heat energy sources. Thus, it seems likely that 
additional conservation measures and renewable energy development, but only above the levels deemed 
feasible now and in the foreseeable future (CEC 2005a), could have some effect on the demand for 
natural gas. 

However, it seems unlikely based on energy demand projections that either increased 
conservation or increased development of renewable energies could reliably replace the need for natural 
gas or provide sufficient energy to keep pace with demand at this time. Work by the ACEEE and the 
CEC seems to support this conclusion. The ACEEE report, for example, recognized that energy 
efficiency and renewable energy are not the only policy solutions required to address the future natural 
gas needs of the country and that additional sources of natural gas will be required from either domestic 
sources or through the importation of gas in the form of LNG (Elliot et al. 2003). 

Denying North Baja’s applications and the continuing high cost of natural gas could force 
potential natural gas customers to seek regulatory approval to use other forms of energy and increase the 
use of other fossil fuels. The effect of high natural gas prices on the demand for other fuels was noted in 
the Energy Information Administration’s (EIA) Annual Energy Outlook 2004 Report. According to the 


3-4 


EIA, the projections for the national growth of total coal consumption increased 0.3 percent from 2003 to 
2004, primarily due to higher natural gas prices (EIA 2004). 

The use of other fossil fuels instead of natural gas could increase emissions of regulated 
pollutants (e.g., NO x , sulfur dioxide [S0 2 ], particulate matter having an aerodynamic diameter of 10 
microns or less [PM 10 ], particulate matter having an aerodynamic diameter equal to of 2.5 microns or less 
[PM 25 ) or unregulated greenhouse gases (e.g., carbon dioxide [C0 2 ]). Compared to other fossil fuels 
such as coal or oil, natural gas is a relatively clean and efficient fuel. Given that there are emissions 
associated with producing, processing, transmitting, and distributing natural gas and other fossil fuels, it 
is difficult to exactly quantify the impact of denying the Project on local and regional air quality. 
However, credible estimates of air emissions can be developed based upon reasonable assumptions 
regarding burning natural gas delivered by the Project compared to burning fossil fuels that would likely 
be utilized if the gas from the Project were not available. 

Table 3.2.1-1 lists the emissions that would result from the combustion of approximately 2.7 
billion standard cubic feet per day (Bscfd) of natural gas in southern California markets and the 
corresponding emissions that would result if an equivalent amount of energy were generated using fuel oil 
or coal in lieu of natural gas (inside or outside of California). It is clear from the table that the use of 
either fuel oil or coal would increase emissions significantly. To comply with current air emission 
regulations, emission control technologies could be required that could limit the economic viability and/or 
affect the location of any new oil- or coal-fired facility. For example, it is conceivable that California’s 
demand for electricity would increasingly be met by oil- or coal-fired facilities outside of California (e.g., 
Nevada or Mexico) if new sources of natural gas are not developed. 


TABLE 3.2.1-1 


Comparison of Air Emissions from Burning Fossil Fuels a 

Emission Rate (tons per year) 


Fossil Fuel 

S0 2 

NOx 

PM 10 /PM 2.5 

CO 

C0 2 

C 

Natural Gas 

297 

44,698 

3,577 

44,401 

49,499,999 

13,500,000 

Fuel Oil 

233,936 

89,405 

5,070 

47,088 

71,774,999 

19,575,000 

Coal 

625,819 

312,911 

13,859 

9,768 

94,049,999 

25,650,000 


a The emissions generated by coal, fuel oil, and natural gas were estimated using the most recent Best Available Control 

Technology (BACT) Analyses found on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Reasonably Available Control 
Technology/BACT/Lowest Achievable Emission Rate Clearinghouse for boilers with heat input ratings between 100 
and 250 million British thermal units per hour. The emissions from each fuel source are estimated based on a total 
annual fuel use of 2.7 billion standard cubic feet per day, 365 days per year. 

SO 2 = sulfur dioxide 
NOx = nitrogen oxides 

PM 10 = particulate matter having an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to 10 microns or less 
PM 2.5 = particulate matter having an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to 2.5 microns 
CO = carbon monoxide 
C0 2 = carbon dioxide 
C = carbon 


3.2.2 System Alternatives 

System alternatives are alternatives to the proposed action that would make use of other existing, 
modified, or proposed pipeline systems to meet the stated objectives of the proposed Project. A system 
alternative would make it unnecessary to construct all or part of the proposed Project, although some 
modifications or additions to another existing pipeline system may be required to increase its capacity, or 
another entirely new system may need to be constructed. Such modifications or additions would result in 


3-5 







environmental impact; however, the impact could be less than, similar to, or greater than that associated 
with construction of the proposed Project. The purpose of identifying and evaluating system alternatives 
is to determine whether potential environmental impacts associated with the construction and operation of 
the proposed facilities could be avoided or reduced while still allowing the stated basic objectives of the 
Project to be met. 

3.2.2.1 Other Existing Pipeline Systems 

Existing pipeline systems currently operating in the Project area were evaluated to determine if 
they could possibly deliver the proposed volumes of natural gas to the U.S.-Mexico border. Existing 
interstate pipeline systems deliver about 5.7 Bscfd of natural gas to markets in southern California (ELA 
2003). A majority of this natural gas comes from production areas in the Rocky Mountains or central 
United States via pipeline systems owned by the Mohave Pipeline Company, Kern River Gas 
Transmission Company, Transwestem Pipeline Company, LLC (Transwestern), and El Paso. The Kern 
River Pipeline, which connects southern California with the Rocky Mountain supply basin, is operating at 
or near capacity and is not capable of delivering significant additional gas to southern California without 
looping at least part of its 926-mile length and adding compression facilities. The Mojave Pipeline 
Company, Transwestern, and El Paso pipeline systems, in contrast, are not currently operating at capacity 
much of the time. However, as discussed previously, the gas supply from the basins that supply these 
pipelines is declining. Additionally, none of these pipeline systems, with the exception of the North Baja 
system, has a connection with the Mexican natural gas pipeline system. Thus, these companies would 
have to build new pipelines to connect to Mexican LNG-source supplies, which none have proposed to 
do. For these reasons, no further consideration was given to these pipeline system alternatives in this 
EIS/EIR. 

The existing natural gas pipelines in the same area that could serve the markets of the proposed 
facilities include the San Diego Gas and Electric (SDG&E) and SoCal Gas pipelines. These pipelines are 
discussed below. 

San Diego Gas & Electric Alternative 

SDG&E is a major wholesale customer of SoCal Gas. The SDG&E system was designed to flow 
natural gas south from SoCal Gas to the San Diego area. For this pipeline to be used to transport gas 
from LNG import terminals in Mexico, a project proponent could utilize a currently inactive pipeline that 
runs from the Transportadora de Gas Natural de Baja California (TGN) system near Tijuana, Mexico, 
north into the United States, and connects with the SDG&E pipeline. This system alternative would 
involve construction of a receipt lateral from the LNG terminal(s) to the TGN pipeline, modification of 
the inactive pipeline and the interconnect with the SDG&E pipeline, upgrading of the SDG&E system in 
order to reverse the flow, and modification of the interconnection between the SDG&E and SoCal Gas 
systems. 

Currently, the SDG&E system is at or near capacity on peak days; therefore, facility 
improvements would be required to accommodate any new natural gas volumes between 300 and 700 
MMscfd (Sempra Energy Utilities 2003). To deliver the 2.7 Bscfd volume that could be transported by 
the proposed Project, it would also be necessary to loop all or part of the 23-mile-long TGN pipeline. 
Larger volumes would require looping the existing pipeline from Santee to Escondido, as well as from 
Escondido to Rainbow, with associated environmental impacts. To bring gas north from LNG import 
terminals in Baja California through San Diego County, an entirely new pipeline would have to be 
constructed through steep terrain containing sensitive habitats and densely populated and commercial 
areas. No such pipeline expansion has been proposed. Moreover, the environmental impact of such a 
pipeline would be at least as great if not greater than the impact of the proposed Project. This alternative 


3-6 


would also not serve the needs of either the Blythe Energy Facility I or the IID. Therefore, this 
alternative was eliminated from further consideration. 

SoCal Gas Alternative 

Currently, the IID receives natural gas from SoCal Gas’ existing intrastate pipelines that extend 
south through the Chocolate Mountains to the Imperial Valley. At present, this system provides neither 
the supply diversity (i.e., access to LNG-source gas) nor direct access to an interstate pipeline system. 
The SoCal Gas alternative, as a stand-alone system, does not presently, or within the time frame of the 
proposed Project, meet the objectives of the Project. Therefore, this alternative was eliminated from 
further consideration. 

3.2.2.2 Pipelines From Other Onshore and Offshore LNG Projects Proposed in California 

There are several LNG import terminals proposed in southern California. If any of these 
terminals are built, some combination of new and existing pipelines would be used to provide LNG- 
source gas to southern California via the existing SoCal Gas infrastructure. Table 3.2.2-1 shows LNG 
import terminals proposed in southern California that have applied for Federal licensing either from the 
U.S. Coast Guard (offshore) or the FERC (onshore). 


TABLE 3.2.2-1 


Proposed LNG Import Terminals and Pipelines in California 


Proponent 

Project Name 

Location/Type 

Proposed 
Capacity in 
MMscfd 
(average/peak) 

Anticipated 
In-Service 
Date a 

Needed Pipeline Construction 

BHP Billiton 

Cabrillo Port LNG 
Deepwater Port 
Project 

Offshore Oxnard, 
CA/New Facility 

800/1,500 

2010 

two 21.5-mile-long, 24-inch- 
diameter offshore pipelines: 
14.3-mile-long, 36-inch- 
diameter pipeline: and 7.7- 
mile-long, 30-inch-diameter 
onshore pipeline 

North Star Natural Gas 

Clearwater Port 
Project 

Offshore Oxnard, 
CA/Conversion of 
Oil Platform Grace 

800/1,200 

2009 

12.6-mile-long, 32-inch- 
diameter offshore pipeline and 
12-mile-long, 36-inch-diameter 
onshore pipeline 

SES Terminal LLC 

Long Beach LNG 
Import Project 

Long Beach, 
CA/New Facility 

700/800 

2010 

2.3-mile-long, 36-inch-diameter 
onshore pipeline and 4.6-mile- 
long, 10-inch-diameter onshore 
pipeline 


a All projects are undergoing delays in the environmental review process and the in-service dates, if the projects were 

approved, potentially would be later. 

Source: CEC 2004, FERC and POLB 2005. _ 


Each of these projects, if built, could provide southern California with access to LNG-source gas. 
However, the purposes of the proposed Project of providing an additional/alternate source of natural gas 
(LNG-source gas) to the IID, the Blythe Energy Facility I, and other regions of the southwestern United 
States would not specifically be met. While it would not be infeasible for SoCal Gas to transport gas 
from the BHP Billiton or SES Terminal LLC projects to the southwestern United States, none of these 
terminals has yet to receive regulatory approval; therefore, it is unlikely that any of these projects would 
be in service before 2010. The proposed Project could allow LNG-source gas to flow into California and 
southwestern U.S. markets by early 2008. The environmental impacts of the above proposed California 
LNG projects are not analyzed in this EIS/EIR because such analyses would duplicate the analyses 


3-7 






already performed in the draft EIS/EIRs that have been prepared for the BHP Billiton and SES Terminal 
LLC projects. 

3.2.3 Route Alternatives 

Route alternatives, within the context of the proposed Project, are identified to determine if 
impacts could be avoided or reduced on environmentally sensitive resources, such as large population 
centers, scenic areas, and wildlife and natural habitat management areas that would be crossed by the 
proposed route. While the origin and delivery points of route alternatives are generally the same as for 
the corresponding segment of a proposed pipeline route, the alternatives could follow significantly 
different alignments. One route alternative was evaluated for the B-Line, and seven route alternatives 
were evaluated for the IID Lateral as discussed below. 

3.2.3.1 B-Line Route Alternatives 

A factor generally considered in the evaluation of route alternatives for a looping project is 
whether it is possible to install the majority of the proposed pipeline 25 feet from the existing pipeline. 
The collocation of facilities is generally preferred by land management agencies, land use planners, and 
other regulatory agencies and has several inherent engineering and environmental advantages. Perhaps 
the most important of these advantages is that new land disturbance is minimized. By overlapping the 
construction right-of-way with other previously disturbed existing rights-of-way, the amount of new land 
disturbance can be reduced significantly. This is particularly important in arid environments where 
revegetation is slow and evidence of construction often persists for years. Because of these advantages, 
alternatives that deviate from the existing right-of-way are generally driven by issues such as the 
engineering impracticality of remaining adjacent to the existing right-of-way, or reducing environmental 
impact. These advantages also explain why this EIS/EIR does not address an alternative route along the 
Arizona side of the Colorado River that was suggested during the scoping process. Route alternatives are 
generally not adopted if they would merely transfer impacts from one or more property owners or 
communities to another without conferring obvious environmental advantages. 

22 nd Avenue Alternative 

Although not mentioned during the public scoping process for the proposed Project, safety 
concerns regarding the placement of a large natural gas pipeline near several residences along 18 th 
Avenue were raised during the planning for the A-Line. As discussed in Section 2.2.1, North Baja 
proposes to install the B-Line within its existing 50-foot-wide permanent right-of-way for the A-Line 
using a standard 25-foot offset. The 22 nd Avenue Alternative was evaluated to avoid potential impacts on 
residents along 18 th Avenue from construction and operation of the B-Line (see Figure 3.2.3-1). 

The 22 nd Avenue Alternative deviates from North Baja’s existing A-Line at MP 14.5, due west of 
22 nd Avenue. At this point, the route extends due east for approximately 0.8 mile across BLM lands 
before descending into the Palo Verde Valley and continuing east across open desert and agricultural 
fields for approximately 1 mile. The alternative then continues east in the roadway of 22 nd Avenue for the 
next 8 miles until reaching Intake Boulevard. The route then turns north for approximately 1 mile, turns 
east on 20 th Avenue for 0.5 mile, and then turns north along the D-10 Canal for approximately 1 mile. 
The alternative rejoins the proposed B-Line route at MP 3.0 on 18 th Avenue. An environmental 
comparison of the 22 nd Avenue Alternative with the corresponding segment of the proposed route is 
presented in Table 3.2.3-1. 


3-8 



o 

(1) 

’o 

> 0 

Q- > 

g ’to 

■- E 

T- <2 0 

I L. 

co « < 

cvi X 0) 

co^ g 

= ^ § 

Q) Q. c 

il E § 

TO < 

'ap£ 

CO csj 

r- CNJ 


^L 


***/. 


3-9 

































































































TABLE 3.2.3-1 

Environmental Comparison of the 22 nd Avenue Alternative with the Proposed Route 

MPs 3.0 to 14.5 

Environmental Factor 

Unit 

22 nd Avenue Alternative 

Proposed Route 

Length of route 

miles 

12.4 

11.5 

Adjacent to existing road or pipeline right-of-way 

miles 

11.6 

11.5 

Canals, drains, and ditches crossed 

number 

26 

20 

Wetlands crossed 

number 

3 

0 

Residences within 100 feet 

number 

11 

17 

New aboveground facility sites required 

number 

2 

0 


The 22 nd Avenue Alternative would be 12.4 miles long compared to the 11.5-mile-long 
corresponding segment of the proposed route. Both routes would cross several canals and drains, but 
construction methods would avoid impacts on those features. Construction of the 22 nd Avenue 
Alternative would require new aboveground facility sites for the installation of a valve at the deviation 
point, as well as a valve and pig launcher and receiver facilities to be located on BLM land on the Palo 
Verde Mesa. In comparison, the proposed B-Line route would only require the expansion of existing 
aboveground facility sites to accommodate new valves and pigging facilities. Additionally, the 
alternative would require 18.3 acres of new right-of-way, while the proposed route would encumber less 
than 1 acre of land because it would be within the permanent easement of the existing A-Line. Operation 
and maintenance activities would be more difficult with the 22 nd Avenue Alternative due to the 2-mile 
separation of the A- and B-Lines and associated aboveground sites. The alternative, however, would 
affect six fewer residences. 

Although the alternative would avoid potential impacts on the residents along 18 th Avenue, it 
would introduce similar potential impacts on residents along 22 nd Avenue and Intake Boulevard. As 
discussed above, route alternatives are generally not adopted if they would merely transfer impacts from 
one or more property owners or communities to another without conferring obvious environmental 
advantages. Furthermore, the advantage gained by temporarily inconveniencing six fewer residences 
along the 22 nd Avenue Alternative is not sufficient to offset the disadvantages of separating the A-Line 
from the B-Line, requiring new aboveground facility sites on previously undisturbed land, encumbering 
more land, impacting more agricultural land, and increasing operation and maintenance work. Therefore, 
the 22 nd Avenue Alternative was eliminated from further consideration. 

3.23.2 IID Lateral Route Alternatives 

The process of assessing routes from the existing North Baja system to the IID’s El Centro 
Generating Station involved the consideration of two key components: (1) the stipulations in the BLM’s 
CDCA Plan; and (2) the crossing of the ISDRA. Figure 3.2.3-2 provides an overview of the routes 
considered in the United States for the IID Lateral. Six of these routes are considered route alternatives 
and are discussed below; the remaining four routes are considered route variations and are discussed in 
Section 3.2.4. Additionally, a route alternative that runs directly from the Gasoducto Bajanorte pipeline 
in Mexico to the IID’s El Centro Generating Station was briefly considered as discussed later in this 
subsection. 


3-10 






o c 
o © 

s- > 

CL O 

C C/) 

.2 § 
r\i (/> '•*-> 
i C TO 
CO CO C 

cvi x ^ 

CO ^ < 


3 0 O 

o) o.cr 

ii- E co 

-2.Z) 

rc _ 

CO cp 

£ CD 

r ^ 

O -j 

z o 




3-11 
















































































































































California Desert Conservation Area (CDCA) Crossing Alternatives 

The CDCA Plan stipulates that new gas transmission facilities located in multiple-use classes 
“L,” “M,” and “I” lands should be located within designated utility corridors. Under the Energy 
Production and Utility Corridors Element of the CDCA Plan, 16 planning corridors have been identified 
to address utility facilities, including all pipelines with diameters greater than 12 inches. 

Utility corridor “L” is a 2-mile-wide corridor that runs east-west through the southeastern portion 
of the CDCA following the All-American Canal, then turns north for 2 miles to rejoin Interstate 8. The 
corridor then follows Interstate 8 for approximately 2 miles to the edge of the BLM’s jurisdiction. The 
proposed route is located within Utility Corridor “L” between MPs 0.0 and 19.0 and MPs 26.0 and 27.5, 
which is through a portion of the NECO Planning Area and the ISDRA. The section of the proposed 
route between MPs 19.0 and 26.0 and MPs 27.5 and 27.6, although lying within a corridor occupied by 
Interstate 8, Evan Hewes Highway, and electric transmission lines, is just north of the designated Utility 
Corridor “L.” Consequently, these sections of the proposed IID Lateral route, where it crosses BLM land, 
would require a CDCA Plan amendment. 

Two alternative routes were examined that would stay within the designated Utility Corridor “L” 
for a longer distance than the proposed route: the Corridor L Alternative and the Bonds Corner 
Alternative (see Figure 3.2.3-3) as discussed below. 

Corridor L Alternative - The Corridor L Alternative deviates from the proposed route at MP 16.3 
and follows SR 98 just north of the CalTrans right-of-way for about 7.5 miles. The alternative then turns 
due north and follows just to the east of the existing transmission lines for 2.5 miles before turning 
northeast and following the southern edge of the CalTrans right-of-way for Interstate 8 for 3.0 miles. 
The alternative rejoins the proposed route at MP 27.3. An environmental comparison of the Corridor L 
Alternative with the corresponding segment of the proposed route is presented in Table 3.2.3-2. 

The Corridor L Alternative would be 2.0 miles longer than the proposed route and would require 
15.1 more acres of construction right-of-way. The Corridor L Alternative would also require significantly 
more permanent right-of-way compared to the proposed route (76.1 acres) because the majority of the 
proposed route in this area would be installed within the county road right-of-way associated with Evan 
Hewes Highway. Because it would be located within the road right-of-way, only a 2-foot-wide 
permanent right-of-way would be retained. Although the Corridor L Alternative would be adjacent to 
existing road rights-of-way for about 81 percent of the route, the pipeline would not be within the actual 
road rights-of-way associated with SR 98 and Interstate 8 because CalTrans’ regulations prohibit the 
installation of high-pressure natural gas pipelines within any State highway right-of-way except by 
special exception as discussed below for the CalTrans Alternative. In addition, the 2.5 miles where the 
Corridor L Alternative parallels existing transmission lines would create new ground disturbance in an 
area where no current ground-disturbing right-of-way is maintained. Overall, the Corridor L Alternative 
shows substantially more habitat diversity than the proposed route, with three subtypes of creosote scrub 
and several locations of tamarisk present. The proposed route has only the Larrea - Ambrosia habitat 
type along its entire length. No residences would be within 100 feet of the Corridor L Alternative or the 
proposed route and no canals or drains would be crossed by either route. 


3-12 




CO 

I 

CO 

cvi 

co 

<D 


co 

0 

> 

g CD 

■2.E 
2 0 

.2 

</> o 

s ^ 

0 
a 
x 
LU 

0 Q 


C 

±,0-0 

O) Q. C 

J- CL <g 

•5,-d 

0 c 

CQ 0 


^ ° 

O -Q 


\ 

\ 




\ ■ 
: \ 

f \ 


J 
£ 
•s 

■t 

■I 


3-13 



















































































































TABLE 3.2.3-2 

Environmental Comparison of the Corridor L Alternative with the Proposed Route 

MPs 16.3 to 27.3 


Environmental Factor 

Unit 

Corridor L Alternative 

Proposed Route 

Length of route 

Miles 

13.0 

11.0 

Construction right-of-way a 

Acres 

96.4 

81.3 

Permanent right-of-way b 

Acres 

78.8 

2.7 

Adjacent to/within road right-of-way and easements 
Vegetation Type 

Miles 

10.5 

10.8 

Larrea tridentata - Ambrosia dumosa alone or with 
other species 

Percentage 

48 

100 

Larrea tridentata - Atriplex canescens and other 
species 

Percentage 

19 

0 

Larrea tridentata with tamarisk and other species 

Percentage 

34 

0 

Larrea tridentata with Prosopis or Acacia 

Percentage 

12 

0 

Residences within 100 feet 

Number 

0 

0 

Canals crossed 

Number 

0 

0 

Drains crossed 

Number 

0 

0 

Lake Cahuilla Area of Critical Environmental Concern 
(ACEC) affected 

Acres 

24.0 

0.1 

East Mesa ACEC affected 

Acres 

0.1 

7.1 

Poor flat-tailed horned lizard habitat affected 

Acres 

93.7 

79.0 

Fair flat-tailed horned lizard habitat affected 

Acres 

2.7 

2.2 

Known archaeological sites within 400 meters c 

Number 

17 

10 

BLM-managed land crossed within corridor 

Miles 

12.0 

3.9 

BLM-managed land crossed outside corridor that would 

Miles 

0.0 

6.6 


require a CDCA Plan amendment 


Based on an approximately 60-foot-wide construction right-of-way. 

Based on a 2-foot-wide permanent right-of-way for the proposed route because the majority of the pipeline in this area 
would be installed within the county road right-of-way associated with Evan Hewes Highway. Based on a 50-foot-wide 
permanent right-of-way for the Corridor L Alternative because the pipeline would not be installed within road rights-of- 
way. 

Based on a literature search. 


The Corridor L Alternative would affect 24.0 acres of the Lake Cahuilla ACEC compared to 0.1 
acre for the proposed route. The Lake Cahuilla ACEC is mapped with its eastern edge defined by the 
electric transmission lines. Because Corridor L is defined as 1 mile on either side of the transmission 
lines, it overlaps the Lake Cahuilla ACEC by 1 mile for the 2.5 miles between SR 98 and Interstate 8. 
The Corridor L Alternative would cross the Lake Cahuilla ACEC for the entire 2.5 miles. The Lake 
Cahuilla ACEC was designated to recognize and protect the significant cultural resources found along the 
eastern edge of the ancient shoreline of Lake Cahuilla (now largely occupied by the irrigated Imperial 
Valley). 


North Baja’s literature review identified 17 cultural resources within a 400-meter-wide Corridor 
L Alternative records search corridor. These resources consist of 2 isolated finds and 15 archaeological 
sites. The sites include lithic scatters, ceramic scatters, temporary campsites, a habitation area, and 
possible cores. The historic sites are refuse and tin can scatters. These sites are not known to have been 
evaluated and may potentially be eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) 
and the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR). In comparison, a literature review of the 


3-14 






corresponding segment of the proposed route identified 10 cultural resources within a 400-meter-wide 
records search corridor. No cultural resources were identified during North Baja’s field surveys of a 100- 
foot-wide corridor for the corresponding segment of the proposed route Although a quantitative 
comparison of the Corridor L Alternative with the corresponding segment of the proposed route cannot be 
made because cultural resources field surveys have not been conducted for the Corridor L Alternative, the 
Corridor L Alternative’s greater impact on previously undisturbed land and 2.5-mile-long crossing of the 
Lake Cahuilla ACEC elevates the chance of unanticipated significant cultural resources discovery and 
disturbance. 

The proposed route would affect 7.1 acres of the East Mesa ACEC compared to 0.1 acre for the 
Corridor L Alternative. The East Mesa ACEC was primarily designated for flat-tailed homed lizard 
protection and management. The proposed route would be within the road right-of-way associated with 
Evan Hewes Highway for the entire length it crosses the East Mesa ACEC. 

North Baja conducted biological resources surveys of the Corridor L Alternative and the 
corresponding segment of the proposed route to compare the extent of flat-tailed horned lizard habitat 
available on each route and to determine the presence or absence of this species. About 97 percent of the 
Corridor L Alternative (93.7 acres) would affect habitat classified as “poor” while 3 percent (2.7 acres) 
would affect habitat classified as “fair.” Similarly, about 97 percent of the proposed route (79.0 acres) 
would affect habitat classified as “poor” while 3 percent (2.2 acres) would affect habitat classified as 
“fair.” For both routes, the habitat classified as “poor” includes sandy silt substrate with pebbles and a 
small portion of desert pavement, and habitat classified as “fair” includes partially stabilized sand dunes 
with some ant presence although the proposed route also crosses a few patches of blow sand. 

A disadvantage of the proposed route is that 6.6 miles would be on BLM-managed land outside 
of a designated utility corridor. Therefore, the proposed route would require an amendment to the CDCA 
Plan. In contrast, the Corridor L Alternative would be entirely within a designated utility corridor and 
would not require a CDCA Plan amendment. However, the Corridor L Alternative would be longer and 
would disturb more land during construction compared to the proposed route. The alternative would also 
require significantly more permanent right-of-way compared to the proposed route because of its location 
adjacent to but not within road rights-of-way. The vegetation that would be disturbed along the Corridor 
L Alternative is also more diverse than the vegetation that would be affected by the proposed route. It 
also appears that the Corridor L Alternative could affect more archaeological sites compared to the 
proposed route. For these reasons, the Agency Staffs believe the advantage of being within a designated 
utility corridor is not sufficient to offset the disadvantages of the greater amount of land disturbance and 
permanent right-of-way required for the Corridor L Alternative and potentially greater impact on 
vegetation and cultural resources. Therefore, the Corridor L Alternative was eliminated from further 
consideration. 

Bonds Corner Alternative - The Bonds Corner Alternative deviates from the proposed route at 
MP 16.3 and follows the same route as the Corridor L Alternative for the first 7.5 miles (see Figure 3.2.3- 
3). The Bonds Corner Alternative then continues west along SR 98 and the All-American Canal. The 
alternative would cross the East Highline Canal (using the HDD method) and continue to the west for 
approximately 3 miles across the Imperial Valley until turning north and following Bonds Corner Road 
for approximately 5.5 miles. The alternative rejoins the proposed route at MP 31.5. An environmental 
comparison of the Bonds Corner Alternative with the corresponding segment of the proposed route is 
presented in Table 3.2.3-3. 


3-15 




TABLE 3.2.3-3 



Environmental Comparison of the Bonds Corner Alternative with the Proposed Route 

MPs 16.3 to 31.5 


Environmental Factor 

Unit 

Bonds Corner Alternative 

Proposed Route 

Length of route 

Miles 

20.0 

15.2 

Construction right-of-way a 

Acres 

145.5 

110.5 

Permanent right-of-way b 

Acres 

121.2 

3.7 

Canals crossed 

Number 

10 

1 

Drains crossed 

Number 

7 

3 

Residences within 100 feet 

Number 

8 

6 

Lake Cahuilla Area of Critical Environmental Concern 
(ACEC) crossed 

Miles 

2.2 

0.3 

BLM-managed land crossed within corridor 

Miles 

1.0 

4.1 

BOR-withdrawn land crossed within corridor 

Miles 

0.0 

0.0 

BLM-managed land crossed outside corridor that would 
require a CDCA Plan amendment 

Miles 

2.4 

6.8 

BOR-withdrawn land crossed outside corridor 

Miles 

1.8 

0.0 

Adjacent to/within road right-of-way and easements 

Miles 

20.0 

14.5 

East Mesa ACEC crossed 

Miles 

0.0 

2.2 

a Based on a 60-foot-wide construction right-of-way. 



Based on a 2-foot-wide permanent right-of-way for the proposed route because the majority of the pipeline in this area 
would be installed within the county road right-of-way associated with Evan Hewes Highway and Hunt Road. Based on 
a 50-foot-wide permanent right-of-way for the Bonds Corner Alternative because the pipeline would not be installed 
within road rights-of-way. 


The Bonds Corner Alternative would be 4.8 miles longer than the proposed route and would 
require 35.0 more acres of construction right-of-way. The Bonds Corner Alternative would also require 
significantly more permanent right-of-way compared to the proposed route (117.5 acres) because the 
majority of the proposed route in this area would be installed within the county road right-of-way 
associated with Evan Hewes Highway and Hunt Road. Because the proposed pipeline would be located 
within the road right-of-way, only a 2-foot-wide permanent right-of-way would be retained. Although the 
Bonds Corner Alternative would be adjacent to existing road rights-of-way for its entire length, the 
pipeline would not be within the actual road rights-of-way because CalTrans’ regulations prohibit the 
installation of high-pressure natural gas pipelines within any State highway right-of-way except by 
special exception as discussed below for the CalTrans Alternative. The alternative would be within 100 
feet of more residences and require more canal and drain crossings than the proposed route. The new 
right-of-way crossed by the alternative would be adjacent to SR 98 in relatively undisturbed habitat across 
BLM lands. An additional disadvantage of the alternative is that it would cross 2.2 miles of the Lake 
Cahuilla ACEC compared to 0.3 mile of the ACEC that would be crossed by the proposed route. As 
discussed above, the Lake Cahuilla ACEC was designated to recognize and protect the significant cultural 
resources found along the eastern edge of the ancient shoreline of Lake Cahuilla. North Baja states that 
the crossing of the Lake Cahuilla ACEC for 2.2 miles elevates the chance of unanticipated significant 
cultural resources discovery and disturbance. A disadvantage of the proposed route is that it would cross 
2.2 miles of the East Mesa ACEC; the Bonds Corner Alternative would not cross the East Mesa ACEC. 
Both the proposed route and the alternative would be outside a designated utility corridor on BLM- 
managed land (6.8 and 2.4 miles, respectively) and would require an amendment to the CDCA Plan. The 
Agency Staffs believe the greater amount of land disturbance and permanent right-of-way required for the 
Bonds Corridor Alternative outweigh its advantages and eliminated it from further consideration. 


3-16 







Imperial Sand Dunes Recreation Area (ISDRA) Crossing Alternatives 

The ISDRA is an important and intensively utilized OHV and camping area. To address the 
concerns of commentors concerning potential conflicts with existing and planned recreational use in the 
ISDRA, four alternatives were considered for crossing the ISDRA: (1) the CalTrans Alternative, (2) the 
ISDRA North Alternative, (3) the ISDRA Transmission Line Alternative, and (4) the ISDRA Grays Well 
Road Alternative. Figures 3.2.3-4 and 3.2.3-5 illustrate the ISDRA route siting factors and alternatives. 
Concerns considered during the evaluation of these alternatives included sensitive biological and cultural 
resources as well as technical issues such as pipeline construction through sand dunes, the crossings of the 
All-American Canal and Interstate 8, and the avoidance of conflicts with other linear facilities (e.g., the 
freeway, several electrical transmission lines, and buried communication facilities). Additionally, another 
major construction effort planned in the same general location, the lining of the All-American Canal, 
needed to be considered. 

CalTrans Alternative - During North Baja’s public outreach efforts, the Off-Road Business 
Association suggested that North Baja consider routing the IID Lateral entirely within the CalTrans right- 
of-way where it crosses the ISDRA because the right-of-way is off-limits to OHV use. However, 
CalTrans acquires and manages its easements for road transportation purposes only. Section 606.4 of the 
CalTrans Encroachment Permits Manual states “Placement of longitudinal utilities encroachments within 
freeway and expressway right-of way is prohibited under Department policy.” Section 607.3 states “High 
risk pipelines conveying gas, oil or other flammable fluid are not permitted unless they are dedicated to a 
public use.” High risk pipelines are defined in the CalTrans Manual on High & Low Risk Underground 
Facilities within Highway Rights of Way to include natural gas pipelines greater than 6 inches in diameter, 
or pipelines operating at a pressure greater than 60 psig. 

The Encroachment Permits Manual also states that under unusual circumstances, requests for 
longitudinal placement can be reviewed under the exception process for State highways, and the approval 
of both the State and Federal Highway Administration is required. Based on past experience with 
CalTrans, the time frame for it to review and potentially consider an exception would be lengthy and 
CalTrans would be unlikely to approve a parallel encroachment when a feasible alternative exists as is the 
case for the proposed Project. Consequently, the CalTrans Alternative is not considered to be feasible and 
was eliminated from further consideration. 

ISDRA North Alternative - The ISDRA North Alternative stays north of the All-American Canal 
between MPs 2.0 and 8.2 of the proposed route. This alternative takes advantage of relatively level 
terrain immediately north of the All-American Canal and would avoid two crossings of the All-American 
Canal and Interstate 8. The alternative would provide a feasible location to stage a long HDD to the west 
under the sand dunes and would emerge in Dune Buggy Flats, which would avoid difficult construction in 
the dunes. However, consultation with IID staff revealed that the All-American Canal Lining Project 
conflicts with this route alternative. The IID intends to utilize the level area north of the existing canal for 
a temporary canal and construction work area (Hocking 2006). 

The ISDRA North Alternative would avoid the high OHV-use Buttercup Management Area; 
however, it would place the pipeline in two other high OHV-use areas. One of these areas lies at the base 
of Test Hill, which is an area heavily used in the fall and winter. The other area is at Dune Buggy Flats, 
an area occupied from late November through March of each year by thousands of OHV users and 
campers. Because of the locational conflict with the All-American Canal Lining Project and the fact that 
the alternative only shifts, rather than avoids, potential conflicts with recreational land uses, this 
alternative was eliminated from further consideration. 


3-17 





3-18 




























































































































































































CD 

C 

i_ 

0 


c/> 

c 

03 
CL 

X 5 

LLI < 

0 0 
C D 
= O 

O) Q. 

U. 0.^ 

. 2,0 

03 C/) 

CQ — 




Z O K 

§ s § 


3-19 


































































































































ISDRA Transmission Line Alternative - The ISDRA Transmission Line Alternative was 
considered in an effort to minimize new impacts through the ISDRA. This alternative would be south of 
the All-American Canal and Interstate 8 and would parallel the transmission line corridor through the 
ISDRA area. This alternative deviates from the proposed route at MP 3.5 (just west of the HDD of the 
All-American Canal and Interstate 8) and continues southwest and follows the existing transmission line 
for approximately 3 miles. The alternative then turns west and would cross Interstate 8 and the All- 
American Canal (using the HDD method) just before rejoining the proposed route at approximate MP 8.0. 
Both the proposed route and the alternative would require two HDDs; however, the proposed route would 
also require a separate crossing of Interstate 8 that would likely be a conventional bored crossing. 

This alternative follows existing utilities and stays immediately south of the more intensive 
camping uses at Midway and Grays Well camping areas, but would be installed in an area used by OHVs. 
Specifically, the ISDRA Transmission Line Alternative would be installed south of Grays Well Road that 
provides access to the Midway Campground and the Plank Road monument, and would stay south of that 
road until crossing under the freeway. This area is also presently subject to a vehicle closure to protect 
desert plant species, including the Peirson’s milk-vetch. If the BLM maintains the closure, the ISDRA 
Transmission Line Alternative would be infeasible. 

Although the ISDRA Transmission Line Alternative parallels existing linear facilities, according 
to BLM staff it crosses both the Buttercup Management Area and adjacent land that is more highly 
trafficked by OHV users than the proposed route. Additionally, the alternative crosses dunes with greater 
relief, which would entail more difficult construction and may potentially require measures to protect the 
integrity of the transmission tower footings, depending on site-specific conditions. Because of the heavier 
OHV use, construction constraints, and potential for the BLM to maintain the vehicle closure, this 
alternative was eliminated from further consideration. 

ISDRA Grays Well Road Alternative - During Project planning, the BLM suggested that the area 
west of the Buttercup Campground between Grays Well Road and Interstate 8 is less intensively used 
than the area to the south of Grays Well Road. The ISDRA Grays Well Road Alternative considers a 
route in the strip between Interstate 8 and Grays Well Road. This area currently contains a wood pole 
line, a fiber optic line (Level 3), and is constricted by a relatively wide (400-foot) CalTrans right-of-way. 
Early investigations suggested that there may be room within this strip for the proposed 16-inch-diameter 
IID Lateral; however, a recent field survey to locate the Level 3 fiber optic line concluded that there is not 
sufficient space within this strip for the pipeline. Therefore, this alternative is infeasible and was 
eliminated from further consideration. 

Gasoducto Bajanorte Pipeline Route Alternative 

A route alternative between the Gasoducto Bajanorte pipeline and the IID’s El Centro Generating 
Station was evaluated (see Figure 3.2.3-6). The alternative interconnects with the Gasoducto Bajanorte 
pipeline west of Mexicali in the vicinity of La Rosita, Mexico. From there it proceeds north and crosses 
the Mexico-U.S. border into California near the junction of the Westside Main Drain and the All- 
American Canal. Once in the United States, the alternative proceeds north adjacent to Brockman Road 
until it crosses the New River 5 miles west of Heber. It then turns and proceeds east following McCabe 
Road to a point about 0.5 mile east of Dogwood Road. At this point, the alternative proceeds north across 
Interstate 8 and a congested area surrounding Evan Hewes Highway until it joins the proposed route just 
east of the IID’s El Centro Generating Station. 


3-20 







o 

0 

o 

Q. 

c 

o 


CD 

> 

0 

c 

0 

0 

o 

cr 


0 

c 

0 CD 

Q. c 

X — 

UJ V 

c 0- 

— CD 

_ 0 r 

O) Q. O 

J- 0 - £ 

.5, to’ 

0 CD 

00 o 

i E 

0 

o 


03 

03 C 

.«§ < 

CD 1 03 

m u 
■2 cc 

O Tf 
3 03 
T3 C 

° 03 
03 Q- 
O CL CNJ 






3-21 































































































































































































































This alternative would be approximately 23 miles in length and thus would be substantially 
shorter than the proposed IID Lateral. About 18 miles of the alternative would be within the United 
States. Nearly all of the pipeline route in the United States (about 17.5 miles) would cross irrigated 
agricultural land; the remaining 0.5 mile would cross urban land uses. 

Although the alternative would have less environmental impact than the IID Lateral based on its 
shorter length, it would not meet the Project objective of providing the IID with a connection to the U.S. 
interstate pipeline systems. As currently configured, the IID Lateral would provide the IID with direct 
access to U.S. gas supplies via the existing interconnection between North Baja and El Paso. As 
discussed in Section 1.1, the El Centro Generating Station currently receives its natural gas from SoCal 
Gas. The volumes delivered by the North Baja system would be used to serve the existing generating 
load at the station and would provide supply and supplier diversification for the IID. North Baja would 
continue to provide southbound natural gas transportation of domestic supplies on its system via 
backhaul. In this way the IID Lateral would enable the IID to gain access to domestic supplies as well as 
the LNG sources in Mexico providing it with greater flexibility and reliability in choosing its gas 
supplies. The alternative would restrict the IID to LNG-source gas solely and would not provide the IID 
with the expanded access to the domestic supplies that it needs. For this reason, the Gasoducto Bajanorte 
Pipeline Route Alternative is not considered to be a viable alternative to the proposed IID Lateral and was 
eliminated from further consideration. 

3.2.4 Route Variations 

Route variations differ from system alternatives or route alternatives in that they are identified to 
reduce impact on specific localized resource issues such as residences, cultural resources sites, biological 
resources, and areas of steep terrain. Additionally, route variations may be examined to avoid conflicts 
with other projects. The four route variations evaluated for the proposed Project are described below. 

3.2.4.1 East Mesa North Route Variation 

North Baja initially planned to locate the IID Lateral in the northern road shoulder of Evan Hewes 
Highway from MPs 8.5 to 26.0; however, the BOR’s plans for the Drop 2 Reservoir would interfere with 
this route. Therefore, North Baja adjusted its proposed route. The proposed route between MPs 8.1 and 
8.5 is on the north side of Evan Hewes Highway. It then crosses the highway to the south side to avoid 
the BOR’s planned supply canal location and continues on the south side of the highway for 5.1 miles. 
The proposed route then crosses back to the north side of the highway at MP 13.6. 

The East Mesa North Route Variation depicted on Figure 3.2.4-1 deviates from the proposed 
route tor 4.1 miles (from MPs 9.5 to 13.6) where it would stay on the north side of Evan Hewes Highway 
(as initially planned) instead of crossing to the south side of the road. This variation was originally 
developed because the BOR indicated it would pursue discussions with Imperial County regarding the 
abandonment of the Evan Hewes Highway right-of-way for a distance of 3 miles between the BOR lands 
and the private lands near Gordon’s Well. The BOR’s intent was to locate the canal and associated access 
roads in the middle of the highway. If this were the case, there would not be room for the IID Lateral on 
the south side of the new canal access road without conflicting with the CalTrans right-of-way for 
Interstate 8 and North Baja would need to adopt the East Mesa North Variation on the north side of Evan 
Hewes Highway. 

As of January 3, 2006, however, the BOR has stated that there is a 98 percent chance that the 
Drop 2 Canal centerline would be just north of Evan Hewes Highway (Wahl 2006). Because the East 
Mesa North Variation would conflict with the BOR’s Drop 2 Reservoir Project, this alternative was 
considered infeasible and eliminated from further consideration. 


3-22 



^ 1 . 


3-23 


Figure 3.2.4-1 

North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 

East Mesa North Route Variation 














































































































































































3.2A2 Imperial Valley Route Variations 

The proposed route through the Imperial Valley includes the area from the west side of the East 
Highline Canal at MP 27.8 to the terminus of the IID Lateral at the El Centro Generating Station. From 
MP 27.8, the proposed route stays on Hunt Road and East Chick Road until MP 38.7 where it turns north 
on McGrew Road for 0.2 mile before crossing Interstate 8 (using the bore method). The proposed route 
then continues adjacent to a private field road to MP 39.7. At this point, the proposed route turns west 
along East Ross Road to MP 41.4 and then turns north along Parker Road for 1.5 miles. The proposed 
route would then be located in field roads on the north side of Interstate 8 for 0.5 mile until turning north 
along SR 111 for 0.2 mile where it would then turn west along the IID powerlines to MP 45.7. 

The number of residences near the route, right-of-way encumbrances on private property, amount 
of farmland crossed, conflicts with other utilities, and scoping comments were considered in developing 
three variations to the proposed route. All three of these variations would be located primarily within 
existing Imperial County road rights-of-way. The three Imperial Valley variations are depicted on Figure 
3.2.4-2. 

Variation A 

Variation A deviates from the proposed route at MP 36.9 and turns north along Barbara Worth 
Road, which crosses over Interstate 8. The pipeline would be bored under Interstate 8, and the workspace 
would be located in a field adjacent to the road right-of-way. North of Interstate 8, the variation continues 
north along Barbara Worth Road for approximately 0.5 mile before turning west along East Ross Road 
and rejoining the proposed route at MP 39.7. 

Variation A would avoid the open field crossing north of McGrew Road, but it would be located 
for a longer distance in East Ross Road, which is a busier road with more utility encumbrances than the 
proposed route. The proposed route follows Hunt Road, which is unpaved, has fewer utilities, fewer 
obstructions, and fewer residences. Variation A, which follows East Ross Road, would impact a greater 
number of immediately adjacent residences, and potentially would have to be routed around underground 
pipe structures associated with irrigation. Any route variations around these pipe structures would require 
the pipeline to be placed in the adjacent agricultural fields. Because of these disadvantages, Variation A 
was eliminated from further consideration. 

Variation B 

Variation B deviates from the proposed route at MP 34.9 and turns north on Mets Road for 0.4 
mile before crossing Interstate 8 and continuing north on Mets Road for 0.6 mile to East Ross Road. At 
East Ross Road it turns west and continues for 4.5 miles until it rejoins the proposed route at MP 39.7. 

Similar to Variation A, Variation B would avoid the open field crossing north of McGrew Road. 
However, it would be located for a longer distance in East Ross Road, which is a busier road with more 
utility encumbrances than the proposed route. Because of these disadvantages. Variation B was 
eliminated from further consideration. 


3-24 


-—— 




j 












\ 

i 


, 




✓ 


' 






; 




o 

0 

o' 

L- 

CL 


U) 

c 

O 


CD 


£ 

O 

<75 to 

IS 

X 13 

LU O 

0, O' 

c >% 

= = 0 
j 0 = 
CD o_ro 

Ii> 

<D 

■ —, L. 

CO 0 

QQ Q. 


CM 

■ 

csi 

co 

CD 


IB 






(rt 

<V 

> 

OJ 

c 

h_ 

0; 


To 


o 

< 

CD 

O 

= 

c 

c 

c 

XJ 

o 

o 

o 

1 

o 


"cD 

TO 

§ 

CD 

CD 

‘u. 

CD 

d: 

> 

> 

> 



3-25 






















































































Variation C 


During the scoping process, landowners along the proposed route on Parker Road expressed 
concerns about impacts on their water delivery system, fences, and landscaping, as well as the possibility 
of losing rental income during construction. Variation C attempts to address this concern by continuing 
west along East Ross Road beyond Parker Road for an additional 0.7 mile. The variation then turns north 
along SR 111, which is a freeway at this location. The pipeline would be installed in agricultural lands 
for approximately 0.2 mile and would then follow an existing transmission line corridor with many other 
utilities adjacent to the freeway until rejoining the proposed route at MP 43.4. 

Both Variation C and the corresponding segment of the proposed route are in areas where 
multiple utilities are already buried adjacent to the road. During field investigations, North Baja 
determined that the utility congestion along the proposed route did not preclude space for the pipeline. 
However, North Baja has not been able to confirm that space is available for Variation C because SR 111, 
a frontage road, a steel tower electric transmission line, and a canal are existing linear features within the 
corridor. North Baja states that it is likely Variation C would, at a minimum, require parallel 
encroachments within electric transmission facility and/or canal easements. A scoping comment was 
received from the owner of a business along the Variation C route expressing concern regarding potential 
negative impacts and disruptions to his business and the proximity of the pipe to the electrical 
transmission lines. Constructing or operating a pipeline in proximity to an electric transmission line is not 
generally considered to pose a safety risk; however, there could be some temporary inconvenience or 
disruption to the business during construction if Variation C were adopted. 

To address the concerns of the landowners along the proposed route on Parker Road, North Baja 
has agreed to install the pipeline on the opposite side of Parker Road from the cluster of homes on the 
west side. North Baja would avoid water delivery systems, including both canals and pipes, by drilling or 
digging beneath them; therefore, no disruption of water service is expected. However, in the unlikely 
event of damage to a water system. North Baja would repair the system and provide an alternative water 
source until the repair is made. North Baja has provided site-specific residential construction mitigation 
plans for all residences and businesses within 100 feet of the construction work area, including the portion 
of the route on Parker Road (see site-specific plan numbers 4200-E-209 through 216 in Appendix O). 
These plans show that the fences, trees, and other landscaping along Parker Road would be avoided 
during construction. As shown in Table 4.8.3-1, the only residential features that would be potentially 
affected by construction along Parker Road are one gravel driveway and two mailboxes. North Baja has 
stated that it does not believe construction of the Project would result in loss of rental income because the 
residents/tenants would still have access to their homes. North Baja would, however, make every effort 
to accommodate special needs on a case-by-case basis, including reimbursing an owner who is unable to 
rent a property because of North Baja’s construction activities. 

Because North Baja has been able to address the specific concerns of the landowners along 
Parker Road, it is uncertain whether there is adequate space to install the pipeline along Variation C, and 
Variation C would merely transfer impacts from one or more property owners or communities to another 
without conferring obvious environmental advantages, Variation C was eliminated from further 
consideration. 

3.2.5 Alternative Delivery Points - Arrowhead Alternative 

On May 24, 2006, North Baja filed an alternative to the proposed delivery points to the SoCal 
Gas system and Blythe Energy Facility I supply pipeline along Riviera Drive. This alternative, referred to 
as the Arrowhead Alternative, would deliver natural gas to the SoCal Gas system at SoCal Gas’ existing 
Blythe Compressor Station at the intersection of 14 th Avenue and Arrowhead Boulevard in Riverside 


3-26 


County. The compressor station is approximately 2 miles north of the location on 18 th Avenue where the 
existing A-Line and proposed B-Line cross Arrowhead Boulevard. The alternative delivery point to the 
Blythe Energy Facility I supply pipeline would be immediately adjacent to the Blythe Compressor 
Station. Metering for the alternative delivery points would occur at a new meter station located within the 
fenceline of the Blythe Compressor Station. The facilities associated with the Arrowhead Alternative are 
shown on Figure 3.2.5-1 and described in detail below. 

The facilities associated with the Arrowhead Alternative include: 

• Arrowhead Extension - 2.1 miles of 36-inch-diameter pipeline extending from MP 7.4 of 
the proposed B-Line to SoCal Gas’ existing Blythe Compressor Station. 

• Blythe-Arrowhead Meter Station and Pig Receiver - these facilities would occupy a 160- 
foot by 200-foot site within the fenced yard of the existing Blythe Compressor Station. 
The gas would be odorized before delivery into the SoCal Gas system at the existing 
odorant facilities within the Blythe Compressor Station. 

• BEI Piping and Tap - 40 feet of 8-inch-diameter pipeline from the proposed Blythe- 
Arrowhead Meter Station to the existing Blythe Energy Facility I supply pipeline and a 
tap into the existing pipeline. 

• Pig launcher, taps, and crossover piping to the existing A-Line and proposed B-Line - 
these facilities would be located in a 150-foot by 225-foot fenced yard in the northeast 

.L 

corner of the intersection of 18 Avenue and Arrowhead Boulevard. 

As shown on Figure 3.2.5-L the Arrowhead Extension would deviate from the proposed B-Line 
at MP 7.4 on 18 ,h Avenue and go north on Arrowhead Boulevard. Between 18 th Avenue and Seeley 
Avenue (MPs 0.0 to 1.0) the Arrowhead Extension route lies within the county road right-of-way. 
Continuing north between Seeley Avenue and 14 lh Avenue, two existing pipelines lie within the road 
right-of-way, leaving insufficient space for a third pipeline. As a result, the Arrowhead Extension would 
abut the eastern edge of the road right-of-way for just over 0.5 mile, cross to the west of the road and an 
adjacent PVID canal (C-05 Canal) to avoid a residence, and continue north for the remaining 0.5 mile, 
abutting the base of the canal levee. Between MPs 1.0 and 2.0, the Arrowhead Extension would be on 
private property. 

Between MPs 0.0 and 1.0, where the pipeline would be installed within or adjacent to Arrowhead 
Boulevard, rights to build and operate the pipeline within the county road right-of-way would be 
authorized under a franchise agreement with Riverside County. Franchise agreements do not typically 
grant a specific strip of land, but simply allow the pipeline to be installed and operated within the road 
right-of-way. North Baja would use a 60-foot-wide construction right-of-way to install the Arrowhead 
Extension between MPs 0.0 and 1.0. Urban construction techniques as described for construction in 18 th 
Avenue would be used (see Section 2.3.2). Access to residents, farm workers, and emergency response 
vehicles would be maintained throughout construction; through traffic would be routed around segments of 
active construction. The measures for construction in or along public roadways that are included in North 
Baja’s Traffic Management Plans for the proposed Project (see Appendix H) would be followed for 
construction of the Arrowhead Extension if the Arrowhead Alternative were adopted. 


3-27 







Existing North Baja A-Line 
“■■■ Proposed North Baja B-Line 
Proposed BEI Lateral 
Arrowhead Alternative 
O Milepost 0 1,000 



2,000 
*5 Feet 


Figure 3.2.5-1 

North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 

Arrowhead Alternative 


3-28 





































































































Between MPs 1.0 and 2.0, where the Arrowhead Extension would be on new right-of-way. North 
Baja would use a 100-foot-wide construction right-of-way, of which a 35-foot-wide permanent right-of-way 
would be retained. Standard cross-country techniques as described in Section 2.3.1 would be used. 
Between MPs 1.0 and 1.5, the pipeline would be located in agricultural land adjacent to the east side of 
Arrowhead Boulevard. At approximately MP 1.5, the pipeline would be installed under Arrowhead 
Boulevard and the C-05 Canal using the bore method. From that point to a termination at MP 2.1 at the 
Blythe-Arrowhead Meter Station, the pipeline would be located adjacent to the west toe of the C-05 Canal 
levee. Direct construction impacts at any given location would last about 2 weeks. Typical right-of-way 
cross sections for the Arrowhead Extension are in Appendix C. The approximate locations and sizes of 
temporary extra workspaces that would be used for the Arrowhead Extension and associated aboveground 
facility sites are listed in Table D-3 in Appendix D. 

If the Arrowhead Alternative were adopted, it would be constructed in 2007 as part of North 
Baja’s Phase I construction activities. Construction would take 2 months for the majority of the activities; 
completion of the Blythe-Arrowhead Meter Station could take an additional 2 months. 

Adoption of the Arrowhead Alternative would result in a net gain in the amount of facilities that 
would be constructed because the new modified connection point into the SoCal Gas system would not 
eliminate the need to connect with the existing Ehrenberg Compressor Station to allow for deliveries to El 
Paso and other markets outside of California, which is currently North Baja’s contractual requirement. 
However, adoption of the Arrowhead Alternative would eliminate the proposed Blythe Meter Station at 
Riviera Drive, the SoCal Gas Interconnect at the Blythe Meter Station, the 0.6-mile-long BEI Lateral, and 
the odorant facility at the Ogilby Meter Station. Table 3.2.5-1 provides a comparison of the Arrowhead 
Alternative with the proposed Project facilities that would be eliminated if the Arrowhead Alternative 
were adopted (referred to in this analysis as the corresponding segment of the proposed Project). 

As shown in Table 3.2.5-1, the Arrowhead Alternative would disturb 24.3 acres of land during 
construction (20.6 acres for the pipeline right-of-way, 2.0 acres for aboveground facilities, and 1.7 acres 
for temporary extra workspaces). Of this total, 6.2 acres of land would be permanently retained for the 
pipeline right-of-way (4.7 acres) and aboveground facilities (1.5 acres). In comparison, the corresponding 
segment of the proposed Project would disturb 9.0 acres of land during construction (4.4 acres for the 
pipeline right-of-way, 4.5 acres for aboveground facilities, and 0.1 acre for temporary extra workspaces), 
of which 5.2 acres of land would be permanently retained (0.7 acre for the pipeline right-of-way and 4.5 
acres for aboveground facilities). The Arrowhead Alternative would impact 16.1 acres of agricultural 
land during construction; no agricultural land would be affected by construction of the corresponding 
segment of the proposed Project. 

The Arrowhead Alternative would permanently convert 0.8 acre of agricultural land to utility use, 
whereas the corresponding segment of the proposed Project would permanently convert 4.5 acres of open 
land to utility use. Except for the new odorant facility at the existing Ogilby Meter Station, the 
corresponding segment of the proposed Project would be within the City of Blythe near existing and 
proposed residential development, while the Arrowhead Alternative would be in an agricultural area with 
only a few scattered residences and no proposed residential development. There would be 7 residences 
within the potential impact radius (PIR) 2 of the Arrowhead Alternative compared to 36 residences within 
the potential impact radius of the corresponding segment of the proposed Project. The minor visual 
impact associated with the Blythe Meter Station would be avoided by adoption of the Arrowhead 
Alternative. 


The potential impact radius is the radius of a circle within which the potential failure of a pipeline could have considerable impact on people 
or property. 


3-29 



TABLE 3.2.5-1 


Environmental Comparison of the Arrowhead Alternative with the Corresponding Segment of the Proposed Project 




Arrowhead 

Corresponding Segment 

Environmental Factor 

Unit 

Alternative 

of the Proposed Project 

Land Requirements 




Length of pipeline 

Area disturbed during construction 

Miles 

2.1 

0.6 

Pipeline right-of-way 

Acres 

20.6 

4.4 

Aboveground facilities 

Acres 

2.0 

4.5 a 

Temporary extra workspaces 

Acres 

1.7 

0J. 

Total 

Acres 

24.3 

9.0 

Area permanently retained 




Pipeline right-of-way 

Acres 

4.7 

0.7 

Aboveground facilities 

Acres 

T5 

4.5 a 

Total 

Acres 

6.2 

5.2 

Biological resources 




Habitat types affected 




Creosote scrub 

Acres 

0.0 

6.1 

Agricultural 

Acres 

16.1 

0.0 

Urban (transportation) 

Acres 

8.2 

2.9 

Cultural resources 




Number of sites in area of potential effect 

Number 

6 

0 

Number of sites likely to be potentially eligible for listing on 
the National Register of Historic Places 

Number 

0 b 

0 

Land use and other resources 




Within existing rights-of-way 

Miles 

1.0 

0.3 

Within new right-of-way 

Miles 

1.1 

0.3 

Active agricultural land 

Acres 

16.1 

0.0 

Homes and businesses within 100 feet of construction 
work area 

Number 

0 

2 

Residential structures within potential impact radius 

Number 

7 

36 

Drains and canals crossed 

Number 

3 C 

0 

Other Factors Associated with Aboveground facilities 




New odorant facility 

Yes/No 

No 

Yes 

Converted to utility use 

Acres 

0.8 

4.5 

Distance from meter station to nearest residences 

Feet 

1,200 

1,000 

Distance to proposed residential development 

Feet 

0 d 

300 

Zoned agricultural 

Acres 

0.0 

0.0 

Zoned rural residential 

Acres 

0.8 

4.3 


Includes 4.3 acres for the Blythe Meter Station and 0.2 acre for the expansion of the site at the existing Ogilby Meter 
Station needed to install the odorant facility. 

Without testing complete. 

The C-05 Canal and two unnamed canals would be crossed. The C-05 Canal would be bored; the two unnamed 
canals would be open cut. 

There are no known proposed residential developments. 


Based on North Baja’s cultural resources surveys, there are six cultural resources along the 
Arrowhead Alternative compared to no cultural resources in the area of potential effect for the 
corresponding segment of the proposed Project. The six cultural resources along the Arrowhead 
Alternative have not been evaluated to determine eligibility for listing on the NRHP; however, North Baja 
would avoid impacts on these six cultural resources. Neither the Arrowhead Alternative nor the 


3-30 







corresponding segment of the proposed Project would affect wetlands, riparian resources, or native 
habitats. Impacts on special status species would be similar. 

The Arrowhead Alternative would modify a small portion of the proposed Project by essentially 
exchanging certain aboveground facilities and short segments of pipeline. Because North Baja’s 
negotiations with SoCal Gas regarding the delivery point to its system are still in progress, the Agency 
Staffs consider the Arrowhead Alternative to be a reasonable alternative and have not eliminated it from 
further consideration in this EIS/EIR. As a result, an analysis of the Arrowhead Alternative is included in 
the applicable resource discussions in Section 4. 

3.2.6 Aboveground Facility Alternatives 

As described in Section 2.1.2, the proposed Project would require new and modified aboveground 
facilities. The B-Line would require modifications at North Baja’s existing Ehrenberg Compressor 
Station and an expansion of its existing Ogilby Meter Station to allow northbound flow of gas. 
Additionally, metering modifications inside the existing El Paso Meter Station at the Ehrenberg 
Compressor Station site would be necessary to allow LNG-source gas to be delivered into the El Paso 
system. North Baja would also construct one meter station, one odorant facility, two pig launchers, three 
pig receivers, and nine valves along the B-Line. The IID Lateral would require the construction of a tap 
and pig launcher at the tie-in with the B-Line, one meter station, one pig receiver, and four valves. The 
BEI Lateral would include associated metering and valving. 

All of the proposed new and modified facilities are necessary to meet the purpose and need of the 
North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project. If the modifications at the existing Ehrenberg Compressor 
Station and El Paso and Ogilby Meter Stations are not made, the facilities would not be able to 
accommodate northbound flow of gas or deliver LNG-source gas to El Paso. Construction of these 
facilities other than at the existing facilities would require disturbance of previously undisturbed land and 
construction of additional pipeline facilities to connect them to the proposed pipeline. The alternative of 
creating new industrial sites would not be environmentally preferable to the proposed Project and thus 
was eliminated from further consideration. 

The proposed Blythe Meter Station would be constructed and operated on a 4.3-acre site along 
Riviera Drive in Blythe at MP 0.5. This facility is needed to measure gas volumes delivered from the 
North Baja system into the SoCal Gas system and the BEI Lateral. As discussed in Section 3.2.5, North 
Baja is in negotiations regarding potential alternative delivery points. The alternative delivery point to the 
SoCal Gas system would be at SoCal Gas’ existing Blythe Compressor Station at the intersection of 14 th 
Avenue and Arrowhead Boulevard in Riverside County. The alternative delivery point to the Blythe 
Energy Facility I supply pipeline would be immediately adjacent to the Blythe Compressor Station. 
These alternative delivery points would eliminate the Blythe Meter Station at the proposed Riviera Drive 
site and add a new meter station (Blythe-Arrowhead Meter Station) within the fenced yard of SoCal Gas’ 
Blythe Compressor Station (see Figure 3.2.5-1). The alternative, referred to as the Arrowhead 
Alternative, has not been eliminated from further consideration (see Section 3.2.5). 

As discussed in Section 2.1.2, installation of an odorant facility would be necessary to odorize the 
natural gas before delivery into the SoCal Gas system; North Baja proposes to install this odorant facility 
at the existing Ogilby Meter Station. Construction of the odorant facility at the Ogilby Meter Station 
would require an approximate 0.2-acre expansion of the Ogilby Meter Station yard and approximately 
400 feet of a new permanent 22-foot-wide access road to allow odorant supply trucks ingress and egress 
to the yard. The Agency Staffs evaluated the alternatives of installing the odorant facility at the proposed 
Blythe Meter Station site or constructing the facility on a new site at a different location. Construction of 
the odorant facility on the proposed Blythe Meter Station site would require an expansion of that site and 


3-31 


would place the facility in a residential area. Construction of the odorant facility at a different location 
would require disturbance of previously undisturbed land and the construction of additional pipeline 
facilities to connect it to the proposed pipeline. The alternatives of creating a new industrial site or 
installing the odorant facility in a residential area on an expanded Blythe Meter Station site would not be 
environmentally preferable to the proposed Project and were eliminated from further consideration. 
However, the Arrowhead Alternative, which has not been eliminated from further consideration, would 
eliminate the need for a new odorant facility because the gas would be odorized at SoCal Gas’ existing 
odorant facilities within its Blythe Compressor Station (see Section 3.2.5). 

Five of the nine valves along the B-Line would be collocated with existing valves at the existing 
aboveground facility sites; the remaining four valves would be collocated with the four existing valves 
along the A-Line. One of the valves associated with the IID Lateral would be collocated with the tap and 
pig launcher at the tie-in to the B-Line and the remaining three valves would be located along the pipeline 
route. The locations of these valves are dictated, in a general sense, by the class location of the area 
through which the pipeline passes, as required in Title 49 CFR Part 192. Although the specific location 
of a valve could be adjusted slightly, the valves cannot be eliminated or moved significantly. None of the 
proposed valve sites would be located in prime farmland or would affect wetlands, unique vegetation 
communities, critical wildlife habitat, or cultural resources. The alternative of relocating the valves to 
other sites would create new disturbance without providing any apparent environmental advantages and, 
therefore, was eliminated from further consideration. 

Pig launchers and receivers would be collocated with other aboveground facilities; therefore, the 
alternative of relocating these facilities would create new disturbance without providing any apparent 
environmental advantages. For this reason, this alternative was eliminated from further consideration. 

During the scoping process, comments were received from the ICAPCD and the Imperial County 
Board of Supervisors that the compressor station associated with the upstream facilities in Mexico should 
be located in the United States so that emissions can be mitigated appropriately. As discussed in Section 
1.4, the upstream facilities are subject to the sovereign jurisdiction of another nation and there is no 
jurisdictional basis for the FERC, the CSLC, the BLM, or the BOR to approve, mitigate, or reject such 
facilities. 

A scoping comment was also received suggesting that the impacts associated with the IID Lateral 
could be avoided by siting the IID El Centro Generating Station on the old Brock Research facility 
property in Imperial County. As discussed in Sections 1.1 and 2.1, the El Centro Generating Station is an 
existing facility that would be the delivery point for the IID Lateral. 


3-32 


ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 



















































4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 


This section describes the affected environment as it currently exists (baseline conditions) and 
discusses the environmental consequences of the proposed Project. This section also discusses the 
environmental consequences of amending the BLM’s CDCA Plan to allow for an exemption to the 
Energy Production and Utility Corridors Element of the plan as well as the environmental consequences 
of amending the Yuma District Plan to allow North Baja to cross the Milpitas Wash SMA. The 
discussion is organized by the following major resource topics: geology; soils; water resources; wetlands; 
vegetation; wildlife and aquatic resources; special status species; land use, special management areas, 
recreation and public interest areas, and aesthetic resources; socioeconomics; transportation and traffic; 
cultural resources; air quality; noise; reliability and safety; cumulative impacts; growth-inducing impacts; 
and environmental justice. 

In accordance with BLM Manual guidance (H-1790-1), the major resource sections address the 
following “critical elements of the human environment:” air quality; ACECs; cultural resources; Native 
American religious concerns; prime or unique farmlands; floodplains; rangeland health; threatened and 
endangered species; hazardous or solid wastes; drinking and groundwater quality; wetlands and riparian 
zones; Wild and Scenic Rivers; Wilderness Areas; environmental justice; health and safety risks to 
children; and invasive, non-native species. These critical elements are based on requirements specified in 
statute, regulation, or executive order. 

The environmental consequences of constructing and operating the North Baja Pipeline 
Expansion Project would vary in duration and significance. Four levels of impact duration were 
considered: temporary, short term, long term, and permanent. Temporary impact generally occurs during 
construction with the resource returning to preconstruction condition almost immediately afterward. 
Short-term impact could continue for up to 3 years following construction. Impact was considered long 
term if the resource would require more than 3 years to recover. A permanent impact could occur as a 
result of any activity that modifies a resource to the extent that it would not return to preconstruction 
conditions during the life of the Project. 

The specific criteria used to determine the significance of an impact are presented at the 
beginning of each major resource section. Unless otherwise noted, all identified impacts are considered 
to be potentially significant adverse impacts before applying North Baja’s proposed mitigation. If any 
impacts remain significant (i.e., continue to exceed the significance criteria) after North Baja implements 
its proposed mitigation measures, the FERC and CSLC staffs developed additional mitigation in an effort 
to reduce any significant impact to a less than significant level. In some cases, although an impact would 
not be considered significant, the FERC and CSLC staffs developed additional mitigation in an effort to 
further reduce impacts. These recommended mitigation measures appear offset with bold type in the text. 
The FERC and CSLC staffs will recommend to their respective Commissions that these additional 
mitigation measures be included as specific conditions to any approvals issued by the FERC and the 
CSLC for the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project. 

The potential environmental impacts identified in this section and the mitigation measures 
proposed by North Baja and recommended by the FERC and CSLC staffs are summarized in tabular form 
in Section 5. The summary table classifies each impact as either Class I (significant adverse impact that 
remains significant after mitigation); Class II (significant adverse impact that can be eliminated or 
reduced below an issue’s significance criteria); Class III (adverse impact that does not meet or exceed an 
issue’s significance criteria); or Class IV (beneficial impact). This table forms the basis for the detailed 
MMP that would be implemented during construction and operation of the North Baja Pipeline Expansion 
Project (see Section 2.5). 


4-1 



As discussed in Section 3.2.5, North Baja has filed an alternative to the proposed delivery points 
to the SoCal Gas system and Blythe Energy Facility I supply pipeline along Riviera Drive. This 
alternative, referred to as the Arrowhead Alternative, would add 2.1 miles of 36-inch-diameter pipeline 
(Arrowhead Extension); a new meter station (Blythe-Arrowhead Meter Station); a pig launcher and 
receiver; and ancillary taps, piping, and aboveground facilities. Adoption of the Arrowhead Alternative 
would eliminate the proposed Blythe Meter Station at Riviera Drive, the SoCal Gas Interconnect at the 
Blythe Meter Station, the BEI Lateral, and the odorant facility at the Ogilby Meter Station. An analysis 
of the Arrowhead Alternative has been included in the major resource topics in this section. The No 
Project Alternative has also been analyzed in the major resource topics in this section. 

The conclusions in this EIS/EIR are based on the analysis of the environmental impacts and the 
following assumptions: 

• North Baja would comply with all applicable laws and regulations; 

• the proposed facilities would be constructed as described in Section 2 of this EIS/EIR; 
and 

• North Baja would implement the mitigation measures included in its applications and 
supplemental submittals to the FERC and the CSLC. 


4-2 


4.1 


GEOLOGY 


4.1.1 Significance Criteria 

An adverse impact on geologic, mineral, or paleontological resources would be considered 
significant and would require mitigation if: 

• construction activities or the siting of facilities would worsen existing unfavorable 
geologic conditions; 

• Project construction or operation would preclude or disrupt the development of mineral 

resources; 

• geologic hazards could cause a rupture or failure of the pipeline or cause damage to 
related facilities that would present a significant threat to public safety; or 

• Project construction would result in damage or loss of vertebrate or invertebrate fossils 
that are considered important by paleontologists and land management agency staff. 

4.1.2 Geologic Setting 
Pipeline Facilities 

The proposed Project is located within the Colorado Desert geomorphic province, commonly 
referred to as the “low desert” in southern California. The Colorado Desert Province is bounded on the 
east by the Colorado River, on the south by the Mexican border, and on the west by the Transverse 
Ranges (Norris and Webb 1990). The northern border lies along the southern edge of the eastern 
Transverse Ranges, approximately at the San Bernardino-Riverside County line. The Colorado Desert 
Province is characterized by its arid climate, broad valleys, and low elevation, approximately 250 feet 
above mean sea level at the Riverside-Imperial County line (Norris and Webb 1990). 

The northwesterly structural trends characteristic of most geologic provinces of California are 
evident in the Colorado Desert Province. The dominant feature of the area is the Salton Trough, located 
in the southeastern portion of the desert (California Division of Mines and Geology [CDMG] 1992a). 
The Salton Trough is a tensional feature that has been seismically active in recent time (less than 11,000 
years ago), and is marked by several right-lateral strike-slip faults as illustrated on Figure 4.1.2-1. The 
Salton Trough is a rift valley that is a northwesterly extension of the Gulf of California, which is formed 
by the East Pacific Rise spreading center. Segments of this spreading center extend up the Gulf and are 
offset by a series of northwest-trending transform faults, the most northerly of which is the San Andreas. 
Geologic and geophysical evidence strongly suggests the presence of spreading centers beneath the 
alluvial blanket within the Salton Trough (CDMG 1977). 


4-3 



o 

0 

■ 

o 

Q. 

c 
o 

‘55 
c 
0 
a 
x 
LU 

0 

c 

O) Q. 
LL CL 

ra 

'aT 

CQ 


■a 

c 

03 

0 

O 

c 

> 

o 


■ 

CM 


<D 


■e 
0 
< f) 
0 
O 

o 

"O 

0 

i— 

o 

o 

O 

0 


o 

0^ 

'o 

i— 

CL 

0 


>» 

> 


M— O 

o < 

0 O 

3 E 

0 c n 

*-*- '<d 

*0 ^ 
Q. 

o 

c 


4-4 
































A review of existing documents (U.S. Geological Service [USGS] 1973), including North Baja’s 
construction reports for the A-Line, indicates that bedrock would not likely be encountered along the B- 
Line and BEI Lateral routes except in the vicinity of MP 29.5 of the B-Line, where blasting is anticipated 
in exposed bedrock comprising intrusive volcanic material overlain by pyroclastic rocks. Other than this 
isolated area of exposed bedrock, the proposed B-Line route is typically underlain by Quaternary (1.6 
million years ago to present) alluvium, colluvium, and terrace deposits, which consist of unconsolidated 
to poorly consolidated gravel, sand, and silt (CDMG 1977, 1999b). Further details are found in the 
Geologic Hazards Study (see Appendix J). 

The eastern portion of the proposed IID Lateral in the vicinity of the Algodones Dunes is 
underlain by wind-blown/aeolian deposits consisting of unconsolidated to poorly consolidated sand and 
silt size material (CDMG 1977). The entire dune chain is migrating southeast in response to strong 
northwesterly winds that occur in the area, especially in the late winter and spring (Norris and Webb 
1990). The East Mesa and Imperial Valley are underlain by Tertiary (66 to 1.6 million years ago) and 
Quaternary sedimentary rocks composed mainly of sandstones, clays, and lake deposits. Alluvial and 
terrace deposits form deep soils above these rock features (Morton 1977). 

The geologic and physiographic conditions likely to be encountered during construction of the 
proposed Project are identified by milepost in Table 4.1.2-1. 

Aboveground Facilities 

All aboveground facilities associated with the B-Line and BEI Lateral would be in areas where 
the surficial geology comprises Quaternary unconsolidated alluvium, colluvium, and terrace deposits. 
The facilities associated with the IID Lateral would be underlain by similar materials, along with recent 
aeolian sand deposits of the Algodones Dunes. 

Pipe Storage and Contractor Yards 

The four proposed pipe storage and contractor yards would be on unconsolidated Quaternary 
alluvial and colluvial materials. Three of these yards were used during construction of the A-Line; the 
remaining yard located near MP 43.5 of the IID Lateral was used for similar purposes in the past. 

Impact and Mitigation 

Construction and operation of the proposed pipeline and aboveground facilities would not 
materially alter the geologic conditions of the Project area. Effects from construction could include 
disturbances to the natural topography along the right-of-way and at aboveground facilities due to grading 
and trenching activities. Along small portions of the right-of-way, natural topographic slope and contours 
would be temporarily altered by the small-scale grading of the construction right-of-way that is necessary 
to provide a level and safe work surface for equipment. After completion of construction, North Baja 
would restore topographic contours and drainage conditions as closely as feasible to their preconstruction 
condition. 

Blasting is only anticipated to be necessary along the B-Line near MP 29.5 because that was the 
only area requiring blasting during construction of the A-Line. The area surrounding MP 29.5 is 
uninhabited desert, with no nearby residences or other development. However, cultural resources features 
are nearby and blasting mats would be employed to keep fly-rock from leaving the construction work 
area. All blasting activities would be conducted in strict compliance with North Baja’s Blasting 
Specifications (see Appendix I). Blasting procedures would be in accordance with Federal, State, and 
local regulations regarding use, storage, and transport of explosives; safety; and environmental protection. 
Blasting would not be required in other areas because most of the pipeline route is underlain by 
unconsolidated to poorly consolidated alluvial deposits or soft, weathered sedimentary clastic rocks. 


4-5 


TABLE 4.1.2-1 


Geologic and Physiographic Conditions Crossed by the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project Facilities 

Geologic Formation or Stratigraphic Unit Blasting 

Mileposts (Geologic Age) Anticipated 3 Topography and Elevation Range b 

B-Line 


0.0 to Younger alluvial, colluvial, and wash deposits No 

12.0 (Quaternary) consisting of unconsolidated sand, gravel, 

and silt. 

12.0 to Younger and older alluvial, colluvial, and wash deposits No 

26.2 (Quaternary and Tertiary). The older deposits consist of 

poorly consolidated silts, sands, and gravels. 

26.2 to Sedimentary clastic rocks (Tertiary) consisting of non- No 

26.7 marine clastic rocks and volcanic conglomerates. 

26.7 to Alluvial, colluvial, and wash deposits (Quaternary) No 

28.5 consisting of unconsolidated sand, gravel, and silt. 

28.5 to Alluvial, colluvial, and wash deposits (Quaternary) Yes 


31.0 consisting of unconsolidated or moderately consolidated 

sand, gravel, and silt; near MP 29.0, intrusive volcanic 
bodies (Tertiary) composed of andesite, dacite, or latite 
porphyry, which may be overlain by pyroclastic rocks 
and flows of acidic to intermediate composition in 
isolated locations. 

31.0 to Alluvial, colluvial, and wash deposits (Quaternary) No 

31.2 consisting of unconsolidated sand, gravel, and silt. 


31.2 to Bouse Formation consisting of sedimentary and 

31.6 Volcanic rocks (Tertiary). Sedimentary rocks consist of 

brackish water limestone, siltstone, and sandstone. A 
1 -foot-thick layer of volcanic tuff may be present at the 
surface, masking the underlying sedimentary rocks. 

31.6 to Sedimentary rocks that alternate between clastic rocks 

33.5 (Tertiary) and younger alluvial/colluvial deposits 

(Quaternary). Clastic rocks consist of non-marine 
clastic rocks and volcanic conglomerates. Alluvial and 
colluvial deposits consist of unconsolidated sand, 
gravel, and silt. 

33.5 to Younger alluvial, colluvial, and wash deposits 

36.2 (Quaternary) consisting of unconsolidated sand, gravel, 
and silt. 

36.2 to Younger and older alluvial deposits (Quaternary and 

57.5 Tertiary) consisting of unconsolidated clay, silt, sand, 
and gravels occurring primarily as valley fill and 
streamwash deposits. 

57.5 to Older Alluvium (Tertiary) partly dissected largely 

71.0 unconsolidated poorly sorted silt, and gravel of alluvial 

fans, and desert pavement areas. 

71.0 to Younger alluvial, colluvial, and wash deposits 

79.8 (Quaternary) consisting of unconsolidated sand, gravel, 

and silt. 


No 


No 


No 


No 


No 


No 


BEI Lateral 

0.0 to 0.5 Younger alluvial, colluvial, and wash deposits No 

(Quaternary) consisting of unconsolidated sand, gravel, 
and silt. 

I ID Lateral 

0.0 to 0.5 Younger alluvial, colluvial, and wash deposits No 

(Quaternary) consisting of unconsolidated sand, gravel, 
and silt. 


Broad flat urbanized area, elevation 
ranges from 250 to 340 feet above mean 
sea level (amsl). 

Generally flat terrain with some badlands, 
elevation ranges from 240 to 340 feet 
amsl. 

Uneven terrain along the base of the Palo 
Verde Mountains, elevation ranges from 
230 to 250 feet amsl. 

Uneven terrain along the base of the Palo 
Verde Mountains, elevation ranges from 
230 to 300 feet amsl. 

Uneven terrain along the base of the Palo 
Verde Mountains, elevation ranges from 
230 to 300 feet amsl. 


Uneven terrain along the base of the Palo 
Verde Mountains, elevation ranges from 
235 to 300 feet amsl. 

Uneven terrain along the base of the Palo 
Verde Mountains, elevation ranges from 
250 to 300 feet amsl. 


Uneven terrain with some badlands near 
the base of the Palo Verde Mountains, 
elevation ranges from 250 to 340 feet 
amsl. 


Generally flat area crossing Milpitas 
Wash, elevation ranges from 360 to 400 
feet amsl. 

Generally flat ascending terrain at the 
base of the Chocolate Mountains, 
elevation ranges between 400 to 1,230 
feet amsl. 

Generally flat descending terrain with 
some badlands, elevation ranges 
between 350 to 700 feet amsl. 

Broad flat alluvial valley in the Salton 
Trough, sand dunes present from MPs 
75.5 to 79.8, elevation ranges from 200 to 
700 feet amsl. 


Broad flat urbanized area, elevation 
ranges from 250 to 340 feet amsl. 


Broad flat alluvial valley, elevation ranges 
from 200 to 700 feet amsl. 


4-6 




TABLE 4.1.2-1 (cont’d) 


Geologic and Physiographic Conditions Crossed by the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Pipeline Facilities 


Mileposts 

Geologic Formation or Stratigraphic Unit 
(Geologic Age) 

Blasting 
Anticipated a 

Topography and Elevation Range b 

0.5 to 7.6 

Extensive sand dune deposits (Quaternary) consisting 
of unconsolidated to poorly consolidated sand and silt. 

No 

Wind-blown sand dunes, elevation 
ranges from 50 to 300 feet amsl. 

7.6 to 

27.0 

Younger alluvial, colluvial, and wash deposits 
(Quaternary) consisting of unconsolidated sand, gravel, 
and silt. 

No 

Broad flat alluvial valley, elevation ranges 
from 200 to 700 feet amsl. 

27.0 to 
45.7 

Younger alluvial, colluvial, and wash deposits 
(Quaternary) consisting of unconsolidated sand, gravel, 
and silt. 

No 

Broad flat alluvial valley in the Salton 
Trough, elevation ranges from 0 to 50 
feet amsl. 


May change based on conditions encountered in the field. 
Elevation range limited to specific area of proposed modifications. 


4-7 





Because three of the proposed pipe storage and contractor yards were previously disturbed during 
construction of the A-Line, and the remaining yard along the IID lateral was previously used for similar 
purposes, any improvements at these sites would be minimal. Activities at the yards would consist of 
minor grading and surfacing, and would not materially alter the existing geologic conditions of the Project 
area or subject the facilities to an increased threat from geologic hazards. 

Construction of the pipeline and associated aboveground facilities would minimally disturb 
shallow geologic deposits; therefore, the potential for construction activities or the siting of facilities to 
worsen existing unfavorable geologic conditions would be less than significant. 

4.1.3 Mineral Resources 
Pipeline Facilities 

The B-Line would cross within approximately 2 miles of known mineral resources such as gold, 
manganese, copper, and sand and gravel deposits (CDMG 1977). Mineral resources zones (MRZ), 
assigned by the CDMG classify the portion of the B-Line in Riverside County as MRZ-4, which is 
defined as having no known mineral occurrences. The CDMG has not classified MRZs within Imperial 
County (California Department of Conservation [CDC] 2004). 

Gold deposits have been found in the southeastern area of Imperial County. The Potholes and 
Picacho Mining Districts are in the southeastern part of Imperial County, about 50 miles east of El 
Centro, California and 20 miles north of Yuma, Arizona. The CDC has identified Principal Mineral- 
Producing Localities (clay and gypsum) in southern Imperial County, although neither is in the immediate 
vicinity of the proposed Project (CDMG 1999). 

The BOR operates a rock quarry between the Cibola NWR and SR 78. The A-Line was rerouted 
to avoid the quarry and lies 0.2 mile to the east outside of the formation that supplies quarry material. 
The B-Line would follow the same alignment. According to the BOR, the quarry is used intermittently to 
supply material for erosion control. 

Other mineral resource/mining areas within the Project area include the Hodge Mine, the Mule 
Mountains Mining District, two California mineral estates, the Old Channel Mine shaft, the Mesquite 
Gold District, and the Cargo Muchacho Gold Mining District. The B-Line would cross the northwestern 
corner of the mineral estate located in Township 12S, Range 20E, Section 16, and west of the Old 
Channel Mine shaft near MP 49.7. Neither of these resources is active. The other mineral estate, located 
in Township 1 IS, Range 20E, Section 16, is 3,000 feet west of MP 42.5. Table 4.1.3-1 summarizes these 
mineral resources in relation to the B-Line. 

No mineral resources were identified within the vicinity of the BEI or IID Laterals. 

Aboveground Facilities 

None of the aboveground facilities associated with the proposed Project would be within 1 mile 
of identified mineral or quarry resources. 

Pipe Storage and Contractor Yards 

None of the proposed pipe storage or contractor yards associated with the proposed Project would 
be within 1 mile of the identified active mineral resources. 


4-8 


TABLE 4.1.3-1 

Mineral Resources and Mining Areas in the Vicinity of the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 

Facility 

Nearest B-Line Milepost a 

Distance from Pipeline 
(miles) 

Hodge Mine 

7.0 

1.6 

Mule Mountains Mining District 

21.0 

5.8 

Bureau of Reclamation Quarry 

30.0 

0.2 

California Mineral Estate 

42.5 

0.6 

California Mineral Estate 

49.7 

0.0 

Old Channel Mine Shaft 

49.7 

0.3 

Mesquite Gold District 

53.0 

4.4 

Cargo Muchacho Gold Mining District 

71.0 

3.9 

a No mineral resources are near the IID or BEI Laterals. 



Impact and Mitigation 

Pipeline projects have the potential to affect the production of mineral resources by restricting 
mineral production activities in the immediate vicinity of the pipeline right-of-way or precluding future 
expansion. However, because the Project would not be near any active mines, impacts on mining 
activities are not expected. The Project would not affect the BOR’s quarry integrity or operation, nor 
would quarry operations have negative effects on the pipeline, given the distance the pipeline is located 
from current and future quarry operations. The potential for the pipeline to be affected by the weight of 
loaded quarry trucks crossing the pipeline would be minimal because the trucks travel from the quarry 
west to SR 78 and do not cross the pipeline to the east. Additionally, the pipeline would be designed to 
accommodate the same loads that SR 78 is designed to accommodate according to CalTrans 
specifications. North Baja would notify the BOR before construction in the vicinity of the quarry. 
Because of the proximity of the BOR quarry to SR 78 and the presence of unsuitable material to the north 
and south of current quarrying activities, future expansion would not be affected by the pipeline. 
Moreover, because no additional active mines or quarries would be within 1,000 feet of the North Baja 
Pipeline Expansion Project, the potential for construction and operation of the Project to preclude or 
disrupt the development of mineral resources would be less than significant. 

4.1.4 Geologic Hazards 

Pipeline Facilities 

Geologic hazards are natural physical conditions that may result in damage to the land and 
structures, or injury to people. Such hazards typically include seismicity (active faults, earthquakes, and 
soil liquefaction), landslides, subsidence, and karst terrain (sinkholes and other water-formed/solution 
features). 

Active Faults - Several active faults or seismic zones lie within the Project area. The primary 
seismic hazard to the proposed pipeline facilities would be moderate ground shaking from earthquakes 
associated with the San Andreas Fault System. Major elements of the San Andreas Fault System in the 
vicinity of the Project include the San Jacinto and Imperial Fault Zones (USGS 2006). The Brawley Fault 
Zone lies between the Coachella section of the San Andreas Fault Zone and the Imperial Fault Zone, and 
transfers slip movements to the Imperial Fault Zones. According to the 1997 Uniform Building Code, the 
seismic hazard potential along the B-Line increases from north to south from a seismic zone rating of 3 
from MP 0.0 to approximately MP 45.0, to a seismic zone rating of 4 throughout the Imperial Valley. 
The IID Lateral has a seismic zone rating of 4 for its entire length (International Conference of Building 


4-9 







Officials 1998). The increase in seismic hazard in the Imperial Valley is attributable to seismic activity in 
the Salton Trough. Consequently, the southern portion of the B-Line route would be in a region that is 
more seismically active than the northern portion. 

Seismic events greater than or equal to a magnitude of 5.0 in the vicinity of the proposed pipeline 
routes that have been historically recorded are listed in Table 4.1.4-1 and shown on Figure 4.1.2-1. The 
largest recorded magnitude earthquake occurred in 1979, with a reported magnitude of 7.0. This 
earthquake occurred approximately 9.4 miles from MP 31.0 of the IID Lateral. As shown on Figure 
4.1.2-1, seismic activity predominantly occurs along the Imperial and Brawley Fault Zones. 

Regionally, seismicity has been attributed to active faulting along various fault zones and/or 
faults. Active faults in the vicinity of the proposed pipeline facilities include the southern portion of the 
San Andreas Fault Zone, the Brawley Fault Zone, and the Imperial Fault Zone. The B-Line, BEI Lateral, 
and associated aboveground facilities would not cross or be near any faults or Alquist-Priolo Earthquake 
Fault Zones (Hart 1997). However, the IID Lateral would cross the Imperial Fault and Imperial Fault 
Zone. The active faults near the IID Lateral are listed in Table 4.1.4-2; the fault locations are shown on 
Figure 4.1.2-1. The Geologic Hazards Study presents details of the probability of seismic activity for 
relevant faults and areas (see Appendix J). 

The Imperial Fault is a right-lateral strike-slip fault that stretches roughly from north to south. 
The IID Lateral would cross this fault at approximately MP 40.0. This fault is very active, with several 
instances of surface rupture and trigger slips on record. The largest of the events to date include surface 
ruptures during a 6.4 magnitude event in 1979 and a 6.9 magnitude event in 1940. The 1940 event caused 
the All-American Canal to shift more than 14 lateral feet, while the 1979 event caused a lateral shift of 22 
inches (Southern California Earthquake Data Center [SCEDC] 2005). Events similar to the 1979 event 
are likely to occur every 30 to 40 years. Events similar to the 1940 event have an average return interval 
of about 700 years. Surface rupture is common along this fault, even during smaller events (SCEDC 
2005). 


The Superstition Hills and Superstition Mountain sections of the San Jacinto Fault Zone lie 
northwest of the western end of the proposed IID Lateral. They represent the most seismically active 
faults in southern California, with significant earthquakes (greater than Magnitude 5.5) and a slip rate 
between 1.0 and 5.0 millimeters per year (USGS 2006). 

The Brawley Fault Zone is a right-lateral strike-slip fault trending in a north-south direction. The 
IID Lateral would not cross this fault; the nearest distance to the fault in proximity to the lateral would be 
10.8 miles at MP 44.0. This fault complex appears to be connected with the Imperial Fault Zone, and 
ruptures seem to have occurred synchronously between the two systems during previous earthquakes. 
The area is characterized by high heat flow due to the local thinness of the crust. Because of the high heat 
flow and the rapid rate of slip, faults in the area are probably prone to aseismic creep, which is relatively 
slow movement along a fault that does not trigger seismic events greater than micro-earthquakes. 

Because of the complexity of the fault system at work, this area is also prone to earthquake 
swarms, such as those that coincided with the ground movement in 1975, breaking the surface trace for a 
distance of 6 miles with a vertical displacement of almost 8 inches (SCEDC 2005). 


4-10 


TABLE 4.1.4-1 


Earthquakes within 62 Miles of the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project with Magnitudes Greater Than or Equal to 5.0 


Source 3 

Shortest Distance from 
Pipeline (miles) b,c 

Milepost 

Year 

Magnitude 

Maximum 
Intensity d 

Latitude 

Longitude 

B-Line and BEI Lateral 







EQH 

18.6 

0.0 

1906 

6.0 

VIII 

33.000 

115.000 

IID Lateral 








EQH 

0.4 

43.0 

1915 

6.25 

VIII 

32.800 

115.500 

SCEDC 

1.8 

27.0 

1935 

5.3 


32.79 

115.26 

USGS 

1.8 

45.0 

1979 

5.5 


32.93 

115.54 

DNA 

1.9 

43.0 

1977 

5.0 


32.820 

115.470 

SCEDC 

1.9 

44.0 

1940 

5.15 


32.83 

115.5 

SCEDC 

1.9 

44.0 

1940 

5.18 


32.83 

115.5 

USGS 

1.9 

43.0 

1977 

5.0 


32.82 

115.47 

USGS-C 

1.9 

43.0 

1915 

6.2 


32.8 

115.5 

USGS-C 

1.9 

27.0 

1935 

5.0 


32.9 

115.22 

SCEDC 

2.1 

13.0 

1951 

5.94 


32.74 

115.03 

USGS-C 

2.1 

26.0 

1935 

5.0 


32.9 

115.2 

CDMG 

2.3 

29.0 

1917 

5.5 

VII 

32.800 

115.300 

SCEDC 

2.5 

45.0 

1953 

5.5 


32.77 

115.54 

USGS-C 

2.5 

27.0 

1938 

5.0 


32.9 

115.22 

SCEDC 

3.2 

44.0 

1940 

6.9 


32.85 

115.5 

USGS 

3.2 

45.0 

1979 

5.2 


32.9 

115.55 

SCEDC 

3.9 

44.0 

1940 

5.41 


32.86 

115.5 

USGS-C 

3.9 

29.0 

1917 

5.5 


32.8 

115.3 

USN 

4.6 

35.0 

1940 

5.5 

VII 

32.700 

115.400 

SCEDC 

5.0 

45.0 

1934 

5.9 


32.77 

115.6 

USGS 

5.0 

45.0 

1979 

5.1 


32.91 

115.53 

SIG 

5.4 

39.0 

1940 

6.7 


32.700 

115.500 

ROT 

8.7 

45.0 

1953 

5.7 


32.833 

115.667 

USGS 

9.4 

31.0 

1979 

7.0 


32.63 

115.33 

PAS 

9.7 

27.0 

1935 

5.0 


32.900 

115.217 

PAS 

9.7 

27.0 

1935 

5.0 


32.900 

115.217 

PAS 

9.7 

27.0 

1938 

5.0 


32.900 

115.217 

PAS 

10.8 

30.0 

1979 

6.6 


32.614 

115.318 

CDMG 

12.2 

45.0 

1928 

5.0 


32.900 

115.700 

EQH 

13.5 

44.0 

1930 

5.0 

VIII 

33.000 

115.500 

USN 

13.5 

44.0 

1955 

5.4 

VII 

33.000 

115.500 

ROT 

13.6 

38.0 

1961 

5.1 


32.567 

115.450 

DNA 

14.3 

45.0 

1979 

6.1 


33.013 

115.555 

PAS 

17.0 

45.0 

1951 

5.6 


32.983 

115.733 

CDMG 

18.7 

38.0 

1918 

5.0 

VI 

32.500 

115.500 

CDMG 

18.7 

38.0 

1921 

5.0 

IV 

32.500 

115.500 

DNA 

18.7 

38.0 

1927 

5.75 


32.500 

115.500 

PDE 

20.5 

45.0 

1979 

5.0 


33.100 

115.550 

PAS 

22.0 

45.0 

1950 

5.4 


33.117 

115.567 

PAS 

22.0 

45.0 

1950 

5.5 


33.117 

115.567 

PAS 

22.3 

45.0 

1946 

5.4 


33.000 

115.833 

PAS 

23.2 

45.0 

1971 

5.1 


33.034 

115.821 

PDE 

23.2 

45.0 

1987 

6.7 


33.010 

115.840 

PDE 

24.2 

45.0 

1987 

6.5 

VI 

33.083 

115.775 

PDE 

24.6 

21.0 

1987 

5.4 

V 

32.390 

115.310 


4-11 




TABLE 4.1.4-1 (cont’d) 


Earthquakes within 62 Miles of the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project with Magnitudes Greater Than or Equal to 5.0 


Source a 

Shortest Distance from 
Pipeline (miles) b,c 

Milepost 

Year 

Magnitude 

Maximum 
Intensity d 

Latitude 

Longitude 

GS 

24.8 

17.0 

1999 

4.9 


32.369 

115.224 

USN 

27.3 

44.0 

1935 

5.0 

VI 

33.200 

115.500 

SIG 

28.2 

11.0 

1980 

6.4 

V 

32.300 

115.000 

PDE 

28.2 

15.0 

1978 

5.0 

VI 

32.290 

115.081 

PDE 

30.5 

15.0 

1999 

5.2 


32.269 

115.138 

USN 

30.9 

18.0 

1954 

5.1 

VI 

32.300 

115.300 

PAS 

31.3 

45.0 

1942 

5.5 


33.233 

115.717 

USN 

31.7 

45.0 

1957 

5.0 

VI 

33.200 

115.800 


Sources were identified by a query search conducted by the National Geophysical Data Center, a division of the National 
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 

The approximate midpoint of the B-Line was used as the center of the radial search. The latitude and longitude 
coordinates for this location are north 33°07’30’’ and west 114°52’52”, respectively. 

“Shortest Distance from Pipeline” is equal to the shortest distance between the earthquake epicenter and the pipeline in 
miles. 

“Maximum Intensity” indicates the maximum Modified Mercalli Intensity (MMI) value associated with the earthquake, 
which is another measurement of perceptible ground movement. MMI indicates the effects actually experienced by 
people in terms of 12 levels of intensity (USGS 1989). Intensity level V is “felt by nearly everyone; many awakened; some 
dishes windows broken; unstable objects overturned; pendulum clocks may stop.” Intensity level VI is “felt by all, many 
frightened; some heavy furniture moved; a few instances of fallen plaster; damage slight." However, magnitude using the 
Richter scale was used whenever possible. 

CDMG = California Division of Mines and Geology; DNA = Decade of North American Geology; EQH = Earthquake History of the 
United States, Gutenberg and Richter; GS = U.S. Geological Survey, Denver, Colorado; PAS = Pasadena, California; PDE = 
Preliminary Determination of Epicentres; ROT = Rothe, J.P; SIG = Catalog of Significant Earthquakes; USN = U.S. Network 
Catalog; SCEDC = Southern California Earthquake Data Center (USGS and CalTech) www.data.scec.org : USGS = Earthquake 
Hazards Program, 1973-2005 Database Search (http://neic.usas.gov L USGS-C = Earthquake Hazards Program, 1735-1974 CA 
Database Search (http://neic.usgs.gov ') 


4-12 








CVJ 

4 

LU 

CD 

< 


CO 

l_ 

0) 

ra 


© 

£ 

o 

>. 

"E 

o 

> 

0) 

-C 

_c 

w 

3 

co 

LL 

© 

> 

O 

< 


c 

0) 

E 

E 

o 

o 


CO 

Q_ 

T3 

C 

UJ 


Q. CD 

•O 

c 

LU 


cc 


0.0 § 
§ ? to 
-Eo| 

— 1 m W © 

S c w 
g-M * 


CO 


_ 5 CD 


C 

ra .2 

c CO 

N ® 


> 
CO 
CD *- 
O CD 


O 


CD CD 
±; O ® 
3 JO 
(0 n ^ 

“■a I 


>v 

■o 

13 
00 = 
c I 
°! 
"D O 
CD O 

© CC 
CO 

JD TO 
C 
CO 
</> 
CO 

E 
o 


. c 


CL 

-3- O 


3 

<0 ~r~\ 

03 £ 

c 

O 

lw 

03 ra 

Zl M 

*D 

CD 

JI- ra 

0 

w_ 

£ 03 


.© 

© 

to 


CD 9 ° 

■o o S 
_2 o ® 

§>JS £ 
«:o 

S J 

© LU 


c jt; 
0 o 

3^ 

CO 


in 

O) 

03 

CD ED 
-3C ^ 
CO CL 

§-lu 

E o 

« CD 


E 
E 

3 

.§ 03 


CO 


£ N- 

• 

!£ cvj 

£ CO 


O) 

I-'. 


o 

CO O" 

— 03 


CD 

sz 


r- 


cn (0 U t 


"D £ = CD 


in 

03 

£ 05 
Hi 3- 

© Q- 

— LU 

3° 

■o ^ 
c >> 
CO JO 


CO 


CD = 

tr ra 

c3 ® § 


03 

CO 

25 

o 


CL CO 


TO 

2 -c 

.9-a 

“ CD 


C 

o 

T3 

CD 

M 

CO 

-Q c/3 
CD — 

- c 

.t- c 

c o 

03 +± 

f 2 

c CD 

i ^ 

is 

ra 00 


03 


TO 

C 

CO ^ 
« tj- 

® OJ 

S T ~ 

"".c 

cd .t; 

-* c 

§ © 
—> k_ 

O’ CD 

.c o. 
tr cl 
CO o 
LU O 


T3 

c 

CO 

ra 

o 

v_ 

W 

3 

CD 


c 

O 

T3 'S 
03 03 
C/3 03 

ra r\ 

JD 


"O 

CD 

© C 

5 § 

CO O 
o ^ 
cr 
_c 

s 


"O 

c 

CO ^ 
03 ^ 
3 03 
03 


CD 


CD 

■*—> 

CO 


CD 

S 
.x 

E o 
CO cc 


CO £ 

0 o 

■§“ 
3 00 
.t; CD 
C 03 
03 t- 

g c 
E o 


o 

03-> 
CD ^ 


E 

03 


sz 

CD 

J3£ 

CO 
3 

cr cd 
-C Q. 

r cl 
as o 
LU O 


■'O’ 

oo 


x 

CO 

E ° 


-Q 

_iC 

c 

CO 

CC 


© 

CO -cr 
cc >> 

CL.9 


in 


o 


co 



03 

co 

CO 

C o 

8 ra 

"D 

C 

CO 

CO 

cn 

o 

o 

^ 2 

© 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o e 

r\ —r 

■© 

3 


© (D _ 

g e c ©• 
ra o cd = 
«i.9-E 
b °l 


ra a) 

® E 
E o 
co © 
Z CD 


o 

o 


3 ^ 
l2 03 

3 t=, 

© © 
CL C 
p ° 

£ N 


in 

in 


CO 

03 

S s 
• 00 

° 03 
. CO 

cvj 

cvj 

i2 cvj 

CO 

£ CO 

£ CO 


03 

£ £ 

1 . CO 

°o o 

cvT 

03 

03 

03 

cvj 

£ CO 

« CO 

in 

CO 

co 

^ CO 

£ co 

£ 

CO 


c\j 


CD 


in 

in 


co 

o 


, 3 - 

d 


oo 

o 


3 ^ 

ra 03 

LL 03 
>>-c 
_© ^ 
$ ® 
2 o 
CD N 


o 

m 

cvj 


N- 

o 


cvj 


co 

d 


o 

03 


O 

O 

in 


co 


cvj 


co 

d 


£ © 
03 © 

in 

o 

m 

o 

c = 

00 

d 

co 

•'J 

ra E 

co 

CVJ 

T— 


_J zz- 

w 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

Q. 

0 

o 

■'3- 

LO 

in 






I 






oo 


c 

o 


M- O 

° £ H. 
o — 
1.2 co 0 

.J o c 

2 ^ ra n 
8.03^3 

3 = ® m 


© 
-♦—* 

CO 


w 


03 

03 


E 

w 

© 

Q. 

Q. 

O 

O 

■O 

c 

CO 

03 

© 

>. 

JO 

TO 

© 

> 

V 

© 

■O 

to 

© 

L_ 

03 

CD 

L_ 

3 

Q. 

3 


*3 ^ 

CD 0) 


Q. 

JZ 

(/) 

c 


0) 

L_ 

Q. 

Q. 17 ) 

v © 

S 5 
w « 

2 o 

© o 


ra 

c 

k_ 

o 

ra 

O 

o 

© 

ra 

co 

© 


c 

© 

E 

_ © 
g> S 
o o 


© © 
1 I 


c 

o 

S .2 
to ra 

© § 
© o 

CO ^ 


© 

So 
~ © 

° £ c 

_ o o 

o 

*3 W 

CJ C 3 W 

© co ra _l 
CO CO LL ^3 


03 


03 

03 


>. 

© 

ra 

k. 

© 

■o 

o 

E 


•o 

© 

_CD 

3 

O 

03 

O 

© 

"O 

3 

03 ^ 

ra c 

E 3 
*- c 
c ~ 
© © 


£ 

c 


3 

CO 


© 

LZ 


-a 

c 

ra 

© 

■o 

3 

_© 

c 


3 

03 

© 

J3 


© 

03 

if) 

< 


O o 


c 

o 

Q. 

"O 

c 

© 


ra 

N 

ra 

I 

o 

E 

© 

© 

co 

o 

.© 

3 

ra 

JO 

o 


o 

c 

© 

u 

3 

O 

© 


II >< 

11 ra — 


x: 

•c 

o 


CL 

•o 

c 


CC LU UJ 


I £ 

T3 

C CO 
© 03 

<- 05 


3 

O 

CO 

II 

CO 

Q. 

•o 

c 


ra 

© 

c 
© 
© 
^_ 

© 

© 

CL 


© 

2 

3 

O 

_ CO 


4-13 








Earthquakes - The pipeline facilities would be located in a seismically active region. The 
potential for strong ground accelerations in the immediate vicinity of the proposed B-Line and BEI 
Lateral is generally low; however, the potential increases along the IID Lateral as it approaches El Centro. 
To quantify seismic hazards in any given region, the USGS developed maps of earthquake shaking 
hazards under the National Seismic Hazard Mapping Project (updated 1996). These maps are used to 
assess probabilistic seismicity and provide information used to create and update design provisions of 
building codes in the United States. These codes provide design standards for buildings, bridges, 
highways, and utilities such as natural gas pipelines. Values on these seismic hazard maps are expressed 
as a percentage of gravity (acceleration of a falling object due to gravity) - the higher the value, the 
greater the potential hazard. 

As shown on Figure 4.1.4-1, there is only a 10 percent chance that the peak ground acceleration 
along the B-Line or BEI Lateral would exceed 10 to 20 percent of gravity in 50 years. The IID Lateral 
would cross through areas of 20 to 30 percent of gravity in the Algodones Dunes, with steep increases up 
to greater than 80 percent of gravity at the terminus of the pipeline in El Centro (see Figure 4.1.4-1) 
(CDMG 1996, USGS 1996). 

Soil Liquefaction - Secondary seismic effects triggered by strong ground shaking are often more 
serious than the shaking itself. The most damaging secondary seismic effect is commonly soil 
liquefaction, a physical process in which saturated, non-cohesive soils temporarily lose their bearing 
strength when subjected to strong and prolonged shaking. As loose granular soils are shaken, they tend to 
contract, which may lead to positive pore pressures that can result in a loss of shear strength. 
Liquefaction typically occurs when the water table is less than 50 feet below ground surface and the soils 
are predominantly unconsolidated. Soils most prone to liquefaction are poorly graded, or in other words 
have a uniform grain size. Sand boils and fissures are a common sign of liquefaction. Sand boils and 
fissures form when saturated sediment below the surface is pushed to the surface by elevated pore water 
pressure. Soil liquefaction can also lead to other ground failures, including settlement and lateral 
spreading. 

Within the Palo Verde Valley, which would include the B-Line between MPs 0.0 to 12.0 and the 
entire BEI Lateral, the depth to groundwater ranges between 9 and 23 feet below ground surface due to 
the proximity to the Colorado River. This area has been identified as having liquefaction hazard potential 
by Riverside County. Although groundwater is less than 50 feet from the surface in the vicinity of the 
Cibola NWR in Imperial County, seismicity is minimal. Where the proposed pipeline route crosses the 
Milpitas Wash at MP 36.0, two nearby monitoring wells indicate the depth to groundwater is between 43 
and 50 feet. Further south (at about MP 79.0 of the B-Line), the depth to groundwater typically exceeds 
50 feet. In the vicinity of the All-American Canal (MP 79.8), the depth to groundwater has been recorded 
as shallow as 35 feet below ground surface. 

To determine the potential for liquefaction hazards, North Baja conducted a Liquefaction Hazard 
Evaluation and Mitigation Study before construction of the A-Line. The report provides the results of 
geotechnical exploration at the Ehrenberg Compressor Station site and along 18th Avenue; analysis of 
soil borings that were previously placed at the Colorado River and the All-American Canal; identification 
of seismic sources. Maximum Magnitude Earthquake values, and site acceleration; Uniform Building 
Code seismic coefficients based on design basis earthquake(s) for the study area; the probability of soil 
liquefaction; and an estimate of permanent ground subsidence induced from liquefaction. The results are 
discussed below. In addition, the Geologic Hazards Study (see Appendix J) includes a seismic hazards 
study and a study of liquefaction potential that were conducted for the proposed Project including the IID 
Lateral. The liquefaction potential study concluded that in addition to the areas identified along the B- 
Line, there are areas of locally high liquefaction potential along the IID Lateral. In particular, areas along 
the East Mesa (between MPs 8.0 and 27.0) and in the Imperial Valley (between MPs 27.0 and 45.7) 
would have a locally or generally high potential for liquefaction based on soil type and potential for 
ground shaking (see Appendix J). 


4-14 







4-15 


Figure 4.1.4-1 

North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 

Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Map 


































Along the route of the IID Lateral, one well has been identified where the groundwater level 
was within 50 feet of the surface. The well is located in the Algodones Dunes, near MP 9.0, where soils 
are primarily unconsolidated sand and silt. Although groundwater is not near the surface in the Imperial 
Valley, liquefaction and sand boils were observed during earthquakes of the late 1970s and early 1980s 
(Bennett et al. 1979, 1984). 

Landslides - Landslides involve the downslope movement, under gravity, of masses of soil and 
rock material. Landslides can be triggered by ground shaking, such as earthquakes, or heavy precipitation 
events. Generally, landslides occur on slopes composed of sedimentary or unconsolidated materials. 
Sedimentary rocks are particularly susceptible to landslides because they commonly contain relatively 
less competent beds of clays and other fine-grained rocks interbedded with more competent beds of sand 
and gravel. 

Slumping is another slope instability hazard that involves the downward and outward sliding of a 
large mass of more consolidated material along a curved, usually concave upward, shearing plane. The 
slump block, or the main block that has broken off, often breaks into smaller mini-slump blocks as it 
slides downslope. Landslide hazards, like earthquake hazards, are more concentrated in California. No 
significant landslides were observed during a site reconnaissance North Baja conducted to evaluate 
geologic hazards along the pipeline route. According to information obtained using the USGS hazard 
mapping and analysis tools, the B-line, BEI Lateral, and IID Lateral routes generally do not cross steep 
terrain prone to landslides or slumping (USGS 1996). With the exception of the edge of the Palo Verde 
Mesa (MPs I 1.6 to 11.8) discussed below, the slopes that would be crossed do not exceed 25 percent 
gradient and have negligible potential for slope instability. 

The banks of the Colorado River at the B-Line crossing location may be susceptible to failure 
during an earthquake or flooding. The B-Line would cross numerous drainages containing alluvial 
material. These drainages are subject to debris flow and flash flood occurrence during sporadic heavy 
rainfall for the region. The Palo Verde Peak area contains moderate to steep slopes that contain blocky, 
volcanic rock outcrops and boulders on the surface. These outcrops are a potential source of falling and 
rolling boulders. Rock falls are most likely to occur during strong earthquakes or large storms that may 
loosen boulders on the surface. However, the proposed pipeline does not appear to be at risk from rock 
falls because the route does not traverse sloping terrain exceeding 25 percent gradient, nor is the route 
immediately at the foot of steep slopes. 

From MPs 1 1.6 to 11.8, the B-Line would cross the terrace edge of the Palo Verde Mesa. The 
terrace slope is generally at a 25 percent gradient, but slopes of 30 to 35 percent gradient are locally 
present along the edge of the mesa. This terrace slope is susceptible to water erosion if significant runoff 
occurs down the slope. The base of the terrace is densely vegetated. The terrace slope to the south 
appears to have been eroded by several small washes that formerly drained a larger drainage basin to the 
west. The drainage is now generally directed to a gulley cutting through the lower terrace about 4,000 
feet to the south of MP 11.7. There are several sand dunes at the base of the mesa to the south, giving the 
appearance of a hummocky topography. The IID Lateral would cross the Salton Trough, where 
topographic relief is generally low. Because the majority of the terrain that would be crossed by the 
Project is relatively flat, significant landslides or associated hazards are not anticipated. 

Subsidence - Subsidence, the loss of surface elevation due to removal of subsurface support, is 
one of the most diverse forms of ground failure ranging from small or local collapses to broad regional 
lowering of the earth's surface. Excessive groundwater withdrawal can lead to subsidence. Within the 
agricultural areas of the Palo Verde and Imperial Valleys, canal water (and not groundwater) is the 
primary source of irrigation water. Therefore, the potential for future subsidence associated with 
groundwater withdrawal would be minimal. Additionally, because of the relationship to water table 


4-16 




decline, this type of subsidence is generally a slow process occurring over broad areas and would not be 
likely to damage the pipeline. 

Karst Terrain - Features such as sinkholes, fissures, caves, and underground drainage that form 
by dissolution of limestone, dolomite, gypsum, or other soluble rocks are considered karst terrain. These 
features can be hazardous due to associated ground failures. The geologic conditions required for karst 
development generally are not present within the areas that would be crossed by the Project. One 
segment of the B-Line that would cross the southern portion of the Palo Verde Mountains (MPs 31.2 to 
31.6) would likely encounter rock types from the upper section of the Bouse Formation. The Bouse 
Formation is identified as containing a basal limestone unit that is overlain by several hundred feet of 
thinly interbedded clay, silt, and sand. However, the presence of karst features in this area is not likely, 
and associated hazards are not anticipated. There are no karst features in the vicinity of the BEI or IID 
Laterals. 

Active Sand Dunes - While not considered a geologic hazard, active sand dunes can either 
expose or bury pipelines as the dunes laterally migrate. The Algodones Sand Dunes would be crossed by 
the IID Lateral between MPs 0.0 and 7.9. The dunes were formed from lake bottom deposits from Lake 
Cahuilla and are an active feature that moves at a rate of approximately 6 to 25 centimeters per year 
(BLM 2003). Winter winds are from the northwest, but often reverse to the southeast in summer. The 
stronger winter winds are slowly pushing the dune system southeastward. 

Aboveground Facilities 

Unlike buried pipelines, aboveground structures are more likely to be damaged by ground 
shaking rather than surface displacement. Results from the Liquefaction Hazard Evaluation and 
Mitigation Study North Baja performed in 2001 for the A-Line indicate that a major earthquake of 
magnitude 7 or greater originating on the San Andreas or Imperial Faults would create a high probability 
for soil liquefaction at the Ehrenberg Compressor Station site. However, underlying ground 
improvements were implemented at the site by densification of liquefiable soil using compaction grouting 
or stone columns. 

The only aboveground facility in the sand dunes area would be a valve located along the IID 
Lateral at MP 7.6 between the All-American Canal and Interstate 8 in an area of relatively stable sands 
and away from actively moving dunes. 

The Imperial Fault Zone is the nearest fault zone to any valve and is approximately 11 miles from 
valve #3 on the IID Lateral. Table 4.1.4-3 summarizes the fault zones in relation to the nearest proposed 
valve locations, identifies the nearest upstream and downstream valves, lists the distance to the nearest 
home or business and town or city, and provides the estimated response time for valve closure. 

The estimated response time for valve closure is complicated by the fact that the IID Lateral is a 
single-purpose pipeline that would serve only the El Centro Generating Station. When the IID chooses to 
use the gas transported by the IID Lateral, it would make a sudden large demand on gas volume, which 
would temporarily substantially drop the gas pressure in the pipeline. Like the existing North Baja 
system, a precipitous pressure drop would trigger an alarm at North Baja’s Gas Control Center, which is 
staffed 24 hours a day. The operator would have 10 minutes in which to determine whether the pressure 
drop is caused by something other than a rupture and either override the alarm or initiate a shutdown. If 
neither of these actions is taken by the operator within 10 minutes, or if line pressure decreases to a pre¬ 
determined threshold before 10 minutes, the valve would close automatically. 


4-17 





4-18 







Pipe Storage and Contractor Yards 

The yards proposed for pipe storage and contractor use would be in relatively flat areas. With the 
possible exception of minor grading and surface disturbance, the topography and soils at these sites would 
not be disturbed. In addition, these facilities would be temporary and operated only as long as needed for 
construction. Therefore, no significant impact on geologic resources associated with the use of pipe 
storage and contractor yards would be anticipated. Furthermore, none of the activities at these facilities 
would be likely to trigger geologic hazards. 

Impact and Mitigation 

Seismicity includes active faults, ground shaking, and soil liquefaction, and is the primary 
geologic hazard that could affect the proposed Project facilities. Seismic events in the vicinity of the 
Project are centered on fault activity in the Salton Trough. Several faults and fault zones are proximal to 
the proposed IID Lateral, the most significant of which is the Imperial Fault Zone (CDMG 1992b), which 
would be crossed at approximately MP 40.0. 

In addition to surface displacement, ground shaking and resulting soil liquefaction can also occur 
with fault activity and could be a potential hazard to the pipeline facilities. Several faults in the vicinity 
of the Project area have the potential for generating earthquakes that could cause strong ground motions. 
A major earthquake of magnitude 7.0 or greater originating on the San Andreas or Imperial Faults could 
affect the Project area within the design life of the proposed facilities. Damage to buried pipelines is most 
often caused by the differential movements of geologic material as opposed to shaking itself. 

Results from the Liquefaction Hazard Evaluation and Mitigation Study North Baja performed for 
the A-Line indicate that a major earthquake of magnitude 7.0 or greater originating on the San Andreas or 
Imperial Faults would create a high probability for soil liquefaction at the Arizona side of the Colorado 
River crossing and on the western portion of the 18th Avenue alignment. Permanent ground subsidence 
induced from liquefaction was estimated to be 0 to 4.8 inches, and surface ground disruption, cracking, or 
sand boil formation is not likely to occur. The potential for lateral spreading is low, except for the 
Arizona side of the Colorado River, where about 1 inch of permanent lateral displacement could occur in 
addition to vertical ground subsidence. 

To mitigate the potential for liquefaction, North Baja incorporated the recommendations of the 
Liquefaction Hazard Evaluation and Mitigation Study conducted for the A-Line into the design for the 
proposed Project. At the Colorado River, liquefiable soils would be avoided by use of the HDD crossing 
method. As discussed above, the liquefaction study included as part of the Geologic Hazards Study 
conducted for the proposed Project concluded that in addition to the areas identified along the B-Line, 
there are areas of locally high liquefaction potential along the IID Lateral (see Appendix J). In particular, 
areas along the East Mesa (between MPs 8.0 and 27.0) and in the Imperial Valley (between MPs 27.0 and 
45.7) would have a locally or generally high potential for liquefaction based on soil type and potential for 
ground shaking (see Appendix J). Lateral spreading near the Alamo River and at canal banks may exceed 
the 0 to 6 inches estimated for other areas. As recommended in the study, North Baja would design and 
construct the IID Lateral to be earthquake resistant using the estimated Peak Ground Velocity and 
Permanent Ground Displacement values given in Appendix J. 

To further mitigate and reduce potential damage to the proposed facilities from earthquakes, 
North Baja’s facility design would comply with Federal standards outlined in Title 49 CFR Part 192. 
This code governs the construction and operation of natural gas pipelines, greatly reducing the potential 
risk of damage. The pipelines and associated facilities would be designed using the Guidelines for the 
Design of Buried Steel Pipe (American Lifelines Alliance 2001), Guidelines for the Seismic Design and 


4-19 


Assessment of Natural Gas and Liquid Hydrocarbon Pipelines (Pipeline Research Council International, 
Inc. 2004), applicable building codes, and/or other similar recognized seismological engineering 
standards. The engineering design drawings for the entire Project in California would be certified by a 
California-registered civil/structural engineer, and would comply with the latest edition of the California 
Building Code. 

Empirical reviews of historical earthquakes demonstrate that pipelines are not prone to failure due 
to earthquakes. A 1996 study of earthquake performance data for steel transmission lines and distribution 
supply lines operated by SoCal Gas over a 61-year period found that post-1945 arc-welded transmission 
pipelines in good repair have never experienced a break or leak during a southern California earthquake. 
These pipelines are the most resistant type of piping, vulnerable only to very large and abrupt ground 
displacement (e.g., severe landslides), and are generally highly resistant to traveling ground wave effects 
and moderate amounts of permanent deformation (O’Rourke and Palmer 1996). 

North Baja has committed to perform a site-specific seismic evaluation as part of its detailed 
design phase for the Project. This evaluation would determine the engineering/design solutions that are 
appropriate to mitigate against the hazard of seismic displacements along the Imperial Fault. The seismic 
evaluation would determine recommended design fault displacements for the pipeline design 
specifications. North Baja would develop a computer model to determine the soil-pipe interaction with 
the proposed applied displacement. The model would evaluate various combinations of pipe wall 
thickness and pipe grade to determine which pattern yields the best performance under displacement 
conditions. The design may also incorporate additional mitigation methods if necessary. Examples of 
additional design features that have been employed on pipelines in earthquake-prone regions include: 

• trapezoidal trench design using loose granular backfill (most common); 

• trapezoidal trench design using geofoam as backfill; 

• installation of the pipe within a culvert; 

• increasing the wall thickness or pipe grade; 

• specialty in-line fittings to accommodate pipe movement; 

• installation of the pipe above ground on elevated supports or pipe hangers; 

• modification of the pipeline configuration; 

• installation of isolation/automatic shutdown valves on either side of the fault crossing; 
and 

• modification of emergency response procedures. 

North Baja would provide a copy of the final design for the Imperial Fault crossing, as well as 
any related geotechnical information, to the CSLC and the FERC before construction of the IID Lateral. 
The final design would also address any measures necessary to mitigate for liquefaction hazards. 

The strength and ductility of the pipeline facilities would further reduce the potential impacts 
associated with displacement caused by surface faulting, liquefaction, and mass wasting. In the unlikely 
event of a pipeline rupture caused by a seismic event (or any other cause), North Baja would implement 
its emergency response procedures, as described in Section 4.14.2. All facilities would be designed with 


4-20 



remote manual pipeline block valves with automatic shutdown capability that are programmed to sense 
pipeline ruptures and to isolate a specific pipeline valve section in the case of a catastrophic rupture in 
that valve section. As shown in Table 4.1.4-3, the estimated response time for valve closure is 10 
minutes. In the event of an emergency. North Baja currently has a procedure in place to utilize the 
Spokane, Washington operations center as an emergency call center. However, the call center in Spokane 
is currently in the process of being changed to Redmond, Oregon. By the time the proposed Project 
would be in operation, the Redmond center would likely be operational. There would also be a corporate 
call center in Calgary, Alberta, Canada. The purpose of the call centers in the first few minutes following 
a rupture is to mobilize company resources to secure the incident site and notify local first responders of 
the incident. The incident site is surrendered to local first responders upon their arrival. Procedures are 
also in place to notify Sempra of any incident occurring on the North Baja facilities so that it can respond 
appropriately with regard to its facilities and jurisdictions in Mexico. Further discussion of North Baja’s 
proposed operation, maintenance, and safety controls is presented in Sections 2.6 and 4.14. 

Because North Baja would design and construct the pipelines and associated facilities in 
accordance with the guidelines, Federal standards, and building codes described above, and the empirical 
studies as cited above indicate that the ductility of pipelines makes them highly resistant to rupturing as a 
result of earthquakes or moderate displacement, the potential for seismic-related events to cause a rupture 
or failure of the pipeline or cause damage to related facilities would not present a significant threat to 
public safety except in the case of the most severe earthquake displacement across the pipeline route. In 
case of severe earthquake displacement across the pipeline route, the threat to public safety would be 
minimized through the use of remote manual block valves with automatic shutdown capability that would 
isolate the rupture, and automated detection and notification of first responders of the incident; therefore, 
the potential for a seismic event to cause a rupture or failure of the pipeline or cause damage to related 
facilities that would present a significant threat to public safety would be less than significant. 

As previously discussed, a review of USGS documents indicates that the majority of the Project 
does not cross landslide-prone areas. The B-Line would parallel the A-Line, which was rerouted to avoid 
the Palo Verde Mountain foothills, eliminating a landslide hazard identified at that location. With the 
exception of the Palo Verde Mesa that would be crossed by the B-Line between MPs 11.6 and 11.8, 
neither the B-Line, the BEI Lateral, nor the IID Lateral cross steep terrain that was identified as having a 
high potential for landslides or slumping. 

In areas of steep terrain, the potential hazard can be reduced by creating a stable and/or level 
right-of-way work area during the grading operation and implementing restoration practices in the CM&R 
Plan (see Appendix E). To prevent a potential instability of the B-Line at the Palo Verde Mesa, the 
pipeline and the grade immediately to each side of the pipeline would be laid back to no more than 30 
percent gradient for the estimated 60-foot-high lower terrace slope. North Baja anticipates minor cuts 
would be needed to accommodate this grade transition. In other areas of steep terrain, North Baja would: 

• restore damaged slope breakers on the existing permanent easement where the B-Line 
parallels the existing A-Line; 

• install slope breakers to control surface water on the new construction right-of-way; 

• install trench breakers to control groundwater flow in the pipe trench; 

• route discharge of surface water away from the slope breakers, and divert or collect 
surface water coming onto the construction right-of-way to pipes in an outflow below the 
slope; 


4-21 


• adhere strictly to erosion control and revegetation measures required by Federal, State, 
and local authorities; 

• bury the pipeline in a deeper trench than normal or place armor above it in areas of 
potential debris flow hazards; and 

• monitor geotechnical conditions for signs of mass wasting, and respond appropriately to 
any indications of instability. 

If these measures are followed, the potential for impacts from slope stability hazards to cause a 
rupture or failure of the pipeline or cause damage to related facilities that would present a significant 
threat to public safety would be less than significant. 

Although the banks of the Colorado River may be susceptible to failure during an earthquake or 
flooding, use of the HDD method to install the pipeline crossing would place the pipeline well below and 
away from the potential areas of bank instability. Therefore, mass wasting of the banks would not affect 
the pipeline. 

The IID Lateral would cross the Algodones Sand Dunes. As previously discussed, active sand 
dunes can either expose or bury pipelines as the dunes laterally migrate. CalTrans has stabilized a 
segment of the dunes and actively manages the area to keep Interstate 8 open to vehicle traffic. The IID 
Lateral would be just south of the CalTrans-managed area and is, therefore, somewhat protected from 
sand dune migration. North Baja would bury the IID Lateral 6 feet deep between MPs 2.7 and 5.7, which 
includes the area most susceptible to blowing/shifting sands and pipeline exposure. If sand depth were to 
increase slightly over the pipeline, this would increase its protection from the elements and from 
vandalism. Therefore, the potential for sand dunes to cause a rupture or failure of the pipeline or cause 
damage to related facilities that would present a significant threat to public safety would be less than 
significant. 

As discussed in Section 4.14, North Baja would prepare and implement an Operation and 
Maintenance Plan and an Emergency Response Plan in accordance with the requirements in Title 49 CFR 
Part 192. Implementation of North Baja’s Operation and Maintenance Plan would further reduce the 
potential threat from the facilities to public safety during their operation. 

4.1.5 Paleontological Resources 

The significance of paleontological remains can be determined by the types of fossils, the 
geologic age of the remains, the assemblage association (the unique biological association or organisms), 
the lithology and age of the rock units, and feature rarity or uniqueness. A paleontological resource can 
be considered to have scientific or educational value if it: 

• provides important information on the evolutionary trends among organisms, relating 
living inhabitants of the earth to extinct organisms; 

• provides important information regarding development of biological communities or the 
interaction between botanical and zoological biota; 

• demonstrates unusual or spectacular circumstances in the history of life; 

• is in short supply and in danger of being depleted or destroyed by the elements, 
vandalism, or commercial exploitation and is not found in other geographic locations; 


4-22 


• is recognized as a natural aspect of our national heritage; 

• lived before the Holocene (less than 11,000 years ago); and 

• is not associated with an archaeological resource, as defined in Section 3(1) of the 
Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979 (16 USC § 470bb[ 1 ]). 

A fossil specimen would be significant if it is: (1) identifiable; (2) complete; (3) well preserved; 
(4) age diagnostic; (5) useful in environmental reconstruction; (6) a type or topotypic specimen; (7) a rare 
taxon; or (8) part of a diverse assemblage. 

Pipeline Facilities 

Before construction of the A-Line, paleontological literature and museum archival reviews for 
previously recorded fossil sites in the vicinity of the A-Line were undertaken. All known geological and 
paleontological literature was reviewed for references to fossils. In addition, museum archival reviews 
were conducted at the University of California Museum of Paleontology (UCMP) at Berkeley, the San 
Diego Natural History Museum, and the San Bernardino County Museum. The UCMP at Berkeley is 
considered the primary repository for fossils in the State of California, and the UCMP collections are 
considered the most comprehensive of all California institution collections. 

Detailed information on the stratigraphy of the area was obtained from numerous geological 
publications. The geology in the vicinity of the proposed right-of-way has been mapped or described 
extensively, including Brown (1923), Dibblee (1954), Strand (1962), Jennings (1967), Metzger et al. 
(1973), Loeltz et al. (1975), Morton (1977), and Stone (1990). Dibblee (1954), Metzger et al. (1973), and 
Morton (1977), provided the most comprehensive and detailed accounts. 

A field survey was then undertaken by North Baja to supplement the literature and museum 
archival reviews. The objective of the field survey was to verify that sensitive rock units occurred at 
mapped points, to document the condition of recorded fossil sites, to identify potentially unrecorded fossil 
sites, and to determine if special mitigation measures need to be implemented. 

With the exception of the Colorado River and All-American Canal crossings, the B-Line would 
be 25 feet from the A-Line for its entire length and cross the same rock types/formations that have the 
potential to contain significant paleontological resources. While most geologic formations have the 
potential to contain fossils, those containing vertebrate fossils are considered to be the most significant. 
Vertebrate fossils tend to be rare and fragmentary, and thus have greater scientific importance than the 
more common invertebrate and plant fossils. 

The B-Line would cross stratigraphic units that could contain paleontological resources, including 
Holocene and Pleistocene alluvial sediments, Pliocene marine sediments of the Bouse Formation, 
Miocene fanglomerates, and Early Tertiary volcanic and volcaniclastic rocks. Rock formations older than 
the Early Tertiary volcanics typically consist of igneous and metamorphic type rocks not known to 
contain fossils. The BEI Lateral would extend from MP 0.5 of the B-Line north for 0.6 mile and cross the 
same stratigraphy as found in the first 11 miles of the A-Line. 

The regional stratigraphy along the IID Lateral route can be summarized into four sedimentary 
units proceeding from east to west between MPs 0.0 and 45.7. The oldest of these, between MPs 0 and 
2.0, consists of Pleistocene non-marine sedimentary deposits locally derived from the flanks of the 
Mesozoic crystalline (granitic) rocks of the Cargo Muchacho Mountains. Between MPs 2.0 and 7.6 west 
of these arkosic sediments, are aeolian (windblown) sands designated “Qs” on the State geologic maps. 


4-23 


West of the dune fields between MPs 7.6 and 27.6 is a 20-mile-long stretch of alluvial deposits that 
include fluvial as well as some aeolian/fluvial deposits (dune sands redeposited by streams). This 
heterogeneous unit denoted as “Qal” or Quaternary alluvium is mapped as “Recent,” but Pleistocene 
intervals are present at about 4 to 6 feet below the surface. 

The most remarkable unit identified along the proposed IID Lateral is the lacustrine sands and 
silts of ancient Lake Cahuilla between MPs 27.6 and 45.7. In addition to these fine-grained arenites there 
are some intervals rich in clay and even occasional beach sands marking the gradual retreat of this large 
lake occupying the center of the Salton Trough. Mapped as “Pleistocene and Recent,” Lake Cahuilla 
sediments date back as far as the Pliocene epoch up to 4 million years in the past in the deeper parts of the 
trough. A thick rich soil profile sits atop these predominantly fine-grained arenites and the entire interval 
is nearly completely unconsolidated. 

Based on the literature and museum archival review, field survey, the paleontological sensitivity 
for the stratigraphic units crossed by the proposed pipeline facilities was determined. The potential for 
fossils to occur based on paleontological sensitivity along the B-Line and BEI and IID Laterals is 
summarized by milepost in Table 4.1.5-1. 

As shown in Table 4.1.5-1, Pleistocene older alluvium and the Pliocene Bouse Formation units 
both have a moderate potential to contain fossils. These units would be crossed only by the B-Line. The 
remaining stratigraphic units that would be crossed by the pipelines have a low potential for fossils. 

The paleontological monitoring conducted by qualified personnel during the construction of the 
A-Line revealed a very limited presence of paleontological resources (see Table 4.1.5-2). Of the several 
areas identified during preconstruction analysis as moderate sensitivity along the A-Line, only about a 1- 
mile-long stretch from MPs 28.1 to 29.1 yielded a single significant paleontological find. Areas of older 
Pleistocene alluvium, and potentially of moderate sensitivity identified from MPs 11.5 to 22.3 yielded no 
paleontological materials. Other areas of older Pleistocene alluvium between MPs 35.0 and 75.2 yielded 
only occasional paleontological materials and no significant finds. 

Aboveground Facilities 

Construction of valve #5 at MP 28.0 on the proposed B-Line would have the potential to affect 
paleontological resources because it would occur in close proximity to where a significant paleontological 
find was discovered during construction of the A-Line. No other aboveground facility sites would be in 
areas anticipated to have significant paleontological resources. 

Pipe Storage and Contractor Yards 

The four pipe storage and contractor yards would not be located in areas anticipated to have 
significant paleontological resources. 


4-24 


TABLE 4.1.5-1 

Paleontological Sensitivity of Stratigraphic Units Found Along the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 

Mileposts 

Stratigraphic Unit 

Potential for Fossils 

B-Line 

0.0-11.5 

Holocene alluvium 

low 

11.5-22.3 

Pleistocene older alluvium 

moderate 

22.3 - 25.2 

Holocene alluvium 

low 

25.2 - 25.8 

Pleistocene older alluvium 

moderate 

25.8 - 26.0 

Holocene alluvium 

low 

26.0 - 26.6 

Miocene fanglomerate 

low 

26.6 - 27.0 

Holocene alluvium 

low 

27.0 - 27.3 

Miocene fanglomerate 

low 

27.3 - 27.6 

Holocene alluvium 

low 

27.6 - 28.2 

Pliocene Bouse Formation 

moderate 

28.2 - 28.5 

Holocene alluvium 

low 

28.5 - 29.2 

Pliocene Bouse Formation 

moderate 

29.2 - 29.9 

Early Tertiary volcanic rocks 

low 

29.9 - 30.2 

Pliocene Bouse Formation 

moderate 

30.2-31.2 

Early Tertiary volcanic rocks 

low 

31.2-31.6 

Pliocene Bouse Formation 

moderate 

31.6-32.6 

Miocene fanglomerate 

low 

32.6 - 32.8 

Holocene alluvium 

low 

32.8 - 35.8 

Miocene fanglomerate 

low 

35.8-36.3 

Holocene alluvium 

low 

36.3 - 75.2 

Pleistocene older alluvium 

moderate 

75.2 - 79.8 

Holocene alluvium 

low 

BEI Lateral 

CO 

o 

i 

o 

o 

Holocene alluvium 

low 

IID Lateral 

0.0-2.0 

Pleistocene alluvium 

low 

2.0-7.6 

Dune sands 

low 

7.6 - 27.6 

Quaternary alluvium 

low 

27.6-45.7 

Quaternary lacustrine sands 

low 



TABLE 4.1.5-2 

Paleontological Resources Discovered During Construction of the A-Line 


Mileposts 

Results of Paleontological Monitoring 

Significant 
Paleontological Find 

25.7 

Unidentified Holocene specimen (bone fragment) 

No 

27.2 

Corals and calcareous algae in Bouse limestone 

No 

27.7-28.1 

Turritelidae fossils, brachiopods, ostracods, foraminifera amphistegina, echinoids, and algae 

No 

27.7-28.8 

Slabs of chert hosting marine invertebrates 

No 

27.9 

Large fossil log in Bouse Formation limestone spoil pile 

No 

28.1 

Slabs of Bouse Formation limestone hosting kummel form echinoids 

No 

28.1-28.2 

Echinoid (sea urchin) fossils of probably Miocene age (14 to 15 million years before present) 

Yes 

28.1-28.2 

Small echinoid crowns, barnacles plates, and shark teeth 

No 

28.6 

Chert/limestone pebbles; crinoids, corals, bryozoans, and sand shark teeth 

No 

28.5-29.0 

Brachiopod in Bouse Formation 

No 

29.1 

Paleozoic brachiopod 

No 

33.1 

Petrified wood specimen 

No 

33.2 

Paleozoic fossiliferous crinoidal limestone 

No 

32.1-35.0 

Limestone nodule with Paleozoic fossil corrals 

No 

41.5 

Two petrified wood specimens in Pleistocene older alluvium 

No 

45.2-45.8 

Marine fossils in carbonate pod (coral, bryozoa, crinoid ossicles) 

No 


4-25 









Impact and Mitigation 

Paleontological resources could be affected by construction of the pipeline and associated 
aboveground facilities as well as by the resulting increased public access to these resources. Without 
mitigation, ground disturbance during construction could cause adverse impacts on paleontological 
resources. The FLPMA of 1976 and NEPA mandate the protection of significant paleontological 
resources on federally owned or controlled lands. The CEQA also requires the protection of 
paleontological resources in California. Direct physical modifications of paleontological resources could 
occur during Project construction by activities such as grading or trenching. Indirect impacts on fossil 
beds could result from erosion caused by slope regrading, vegetation clearing, and unauthorized 
collection. Avoidance of significant fossil localities is the most effective mitigation method. If avoidance 
is not possible, scientific excavation to recover fossil materials would reduce the impacts to an acceptable 
level. 


Based on the archival research and monitoring undertaken during the construction of the A-Line, 
monitoring of the B-Line construction by a paleontologist would be warranted between MPs 27.0 and 
29.1, where the outer edge of the Bouse Formation would be crossed. This milepost range includes the 
location of valve #5. Because the stratigraphic unit that would be crossed by the BEI Lateral has a low 
potential to yield paleontological resources, construction impacts on paleontological resources would not 
be expected. 

The four stratigraphic units that would be crossed by the IID Lateral (Pleistocene alluvial fan 
deposits, dune sands. Quaternary alluvium, and Quaternary lake deposits) have low potential to yield 
paleontological resources. Therefore, the construction of the IID Lateral is unlikely to impact such 
resources. 

To address potential impacts on paleontological resources resulting from pipeline construction. 
North Baja developed a Paleontological Resource Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (PRMM Plan) for the 
North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project (see Appendix K). The PRMM Plan includes a summary of the 
literature and museum archival review, field survey results, and assessment of potential impacts on 
paleontological resources. The PRMM Plan also includes Project-wide and site-specific mitigation and 
monitoring measures and curation and reporting procedures that would be implemented during 
construction. Some pertinent measures contained in North Baja’s PRMM Plan include: 

• availability of a qualified Project paleontologist to be called to the Project area to respond 
to construction-related issues; 

• training of construction personnel and Els regarding the possibility that fossil resources 
may be encountered during construction; 

• granting of authority for the El to temporarily halt construction to allow for assessment 
by the Project paleontologist and implementation of mitigation procedures if warranted; 

• salvage of significant fossils as determined necessary by the Project paleontologist; and 

• protocol for curation and repository storage of fossils. 

Following construction, North Baja’s Project paleontologist would prepare a final paleontological 
report. The final report would be distributed to the FERC, the CSLC, the BLM, the BOR, the Cibola 
NWR, and other interested parties. 


4-26 


In summary, the overall potential to recover salvageable paleontological resources from the 
surficial units along the proposed B-Line is low, with the exception of the area between MPs 27.0 and 
29.1. During construction. North Baja would conduct paleontological monitoring within this area, which 
includes the proposed site of valve #5. Similarly, the overall potential to recover salvageable 
paleontological resources from the surficial units along the proposed IID Lateral route is low. North Baja 
would conduct spot monitoring between MPs 27.6 and 46.0 of the IID Lateral unless excavation unearths 
coarse beach intervals or thicker sand/gravel lenses. If these characteristics are exposed, continuous 
monitoring would be conducted. Because the potential for paleontological resources to occur within the 
Project area is low, and North Baja would implement its PRMM Plan, which specifies paleontological 
monitoring in areas identified as having moderate potential for paleontological resources, the potential 
that construction of the Project would result in damage or loss of vertebrate or invertebrate fossils that are 
considered important by paleontologists and land management agency staff would be less than significant. 

4.1.6 Arrowhead Alternative 

No bedrock is expected to be encountered along the route of the Arrowhead Alternative; 
therefore, no blasting is anticipated. There are no mineral resource/mining resource areas in the vicinity 
of the Arrowhead Alternative. Additionally, the Arrowhead Alternative would not cross or be located 
near any faults or fault zones. The Arrowhead Alternative is located in the vicinity of the proposed B- 
Line and BEI Lateral, an area that has low potential for strong ground accelerations (see Section 4.1.4). 
The liquefaction potential identified for the B-Line along the western portion of 18th Avenue would also 
be expected along the route of the Arrowhead Alternative. The recommendations of the Liquefaction 
Hazard Evaluation and Mitigation Study conducted for the A-line would be incorporated into the design 
of the Arrowhead Alternative if it were adopted (see Section 4.1.4). There are no landside-prone, 
subsidence-prone, karst terrain, or sand dune areas along the Arrowhead Alternative. 

The Arrowhead Alternative is located in the Holocene Alluvium Stratigraphic Unit, which has a 
low sensitivity for the occurrence of fossils. 

4.1.7 No Project Alternative 

Under the No Project Alternative, the FERC would deny North Baja’s application for a 
Certificate and a Presidential Permit amendment, the CSLC would deny North Baja’s application for an 
amendment to its right-of-way lease across California’s Sovereign and School Lands, and the BLM would 
deny North Baja’s application to amend its existing Right-of-Way Grant and obtain a Temporary Use 
Permit for the portion of the Project on Federal lands. The No Project Alternative means that the Project 
would not go forward and the Project-related facilities would not be installed. Accordingly, none of the 
potential environmental impacts identified for the construction and operation of the proposed Project 
would occur. 

Because the proposed Project is privately funded, it is unknown whether North Baja would fund 
another energy project in California. However, should the No Project Alternative be selected, the energy 
needs identified in Section 1.1 would likely be addressed through other means, such as through other 
LNG or natural gas-related pipeline projects. Such projects may result in potential environmental impacts 
of the nature and magnitude of the proposed Project as well as impacts particular to their respective 
configurations and operations; however, these impacts cannot be predicted with any certainty at this time. 


4-27 


4.2 SOILS 


4.2.1 Significance Criteria 

An adverse impact on soils would be considered significant and would require mitigation if 
Project construction or operation would: 

• increase erosion rates or reduce soil productivity by compaction or soil mixing to a level 
that would prevent successful rehabilitation and eventual re-establishment of vegetative 
cover to the recommended or preconstruction composition and density; 

• reduce agricultural productivity for longer than 3 years as a result of soil mixing, 
structural damage, or compaction; 

• increase exposure of human or ecological receptors to potentially hazardous levels of 
chemicals or explosives due to the disturbance of contaminated soils or to the discharge 
or disposal into soils of hazardous materials; or 

• result in the need for a significantly wider construction right-of-way and/or the increased 
potential for pipe exposure during operations due to the presence of unconsolidated and 
unstable soils. 

4.2.2 Existing Soil Resources 

The soils crossed by the proposed Project were analyzed using the State Soil Geographic 
(STATSGO) database developed by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation 
Service (NRCS) for use in regional, multi-state, river basin. State, and multi-county resource planning. 
STATSGO spatial data are compiled by combining geologically and topographically related soil series 
found in county soil surveys into larger map units called Map Unit Identifiers (MUIDs). The B-Line 
would cross 7 MUIDs comprising 42 soil components (see Figure 4.2.2-1), while the BEI Lateral would 
cross only 1 MUID comprising 14 soil components. The IID Lateral would cross 5 MUIDs comprising 
79 soil components (see Figure 4.2.2-2). The characteristics of soils that would be crossed by the small 
segment of pipeline route in Arizona and at the sites of the Ehrenberg Compressor Station, El Paso Meter 
Station, Blythe Meter Station, Rannells Trap, Ogilby Meter Station, and El Centro Meter Station were 
further assessed using county soil surveys. 

Pipeline Facilities 

The soils that would be crossed by the B-Line in La Paz County, Arizona consist of silt and sandy 
loams and sands. The soils that would be crossed by the B-Line and BEI Lateral in the northern portion 
of Riverside County, California include sandy loams, silty clay loams, and silty clays. Soils in the 
southern portion of Riverside County that would be crossed by the B-Line include silty clays, sandy 
loams, gravelly loamy sands, gravelly sands, sand, dune land, and badlands. In the Palo Verde Valley, the 
soils are primarily formed in sediments deposited by the Colorado River. These soils are highly 
productive and are ideal for agricultural use if irrigated due to mineral content. Soil types are diverse 
along the B-Line in Imperial County, California, with loamy and fine sands; sandy, gravelly, and clay 
loams; and clay and silty clays, with badland and rock outcrops. Many areas along the southern portion 
of the B-Line route in Imperial County have a gravelly desert pavement present over the surface soils. 


4-28 



^ 0 

O c 
Q) _| 



CM 

csi 

■ 

<D 


CL 0 

C £ 

.2 >. 
to -Q 

TO 0 
CL 0 

X £ 
LU O 

0 CJ 

.E CO 

0 


0 

a 


3 

a) 

Ll Q_ C 
_ 0 
•5,-0 
re — 
CD f 



CO 

0 




00 


CM 


O 


^ z 


TJ 

C 

<D 

O) 

OJ 


I fi I 

£ o ro 

9 ^ o 

I 5 _j 


s g 
1 f 
1 2 


fc Q 

III 

-z c w_ 
< o a> 

(U 


O) E 
< §> 


c < 
Q 


» & 


ai ? i i 


* 


4-29 














































£9 

C 0 
.2 £ 
CM g ^ 

I C _Q 
^ Q. -O 

CM x 2 

HI CO 

S..EO 

3 (D c/3 

.5>.2-o3 

LL Q. g 

ro c 
■=» <r 

T3 

QQ — 

fi 

Z Q- 

03 



■o 

c 

0) 

O) 

0) 



4-30 



























































Soils that would be crossed by the eastern portion of the IID Lateral, including the area of the 
Imperial Sand Dunes, are typically loose, sandy, excessively drained soils. West of the dunes area into 
the East Mesa area, the soils are typically sandy, loamy, and well drained to excessively drained. Many 
areas within the East Mesa area have a gravelly desert pavement present over the surface soils. West of 
the East Mesa area through the Imperial Valley, the soils are predominantly fine, silty loamy soils that are 
well to moderately well drained with patches of coarse loamy, coarse silty, and sandy well- to moderately 
well-drained soils interspersed. The soils in the Imperial Valley are primarily mineral-rich sediments 
historically deposited by Lake Cahuilla. These soils are highly productive due to their mineral content, 
and are ideal for agricultural use if irrigated. 

The agricultural land in the Palo Verde and Imperial Valleys is irrigated with systems using water 
from irrigation drains and canals. 

The soils along the B-Line, BEI Lateral, and the IID Lateral were evaluated to identify prime 
farmland and major soil characteristics that could affect construction or increase the potential for 
construction-related soil impacts. The primary limiting characteristics include high water erosion 
potential, high wind erosion potential, and shallow depth to bedrock. Each soil component was evaluated 
for these limitations, and then the percentage of each MUID with these limitations was summarized. The 
percentage, along with the length of pipeline route in each MUID, was used to estimate the acreage of 
soils with limitations that would be crossed by the B-Line and BEI and IID Laterals. Table 4.2.2-1 
summarizes by MUID and milepost the acres of soil limitations that would be affected by the proposed 
pipeline facilities. The nature and prevalence of each major characteristic are discussed below. 

Erosion Potential from Water - Erosion is an ongoing, natural process that can be accelerated by 
human disturbance. Factors such as soil texture, structure, slope, vegetative cover, rainfall intensity, and 
wind intensity can influence the severity of erosion. Soils most susceptible to erosion by water are 
typified by bare or sparse vegetative cover, non-cohesive soil particles, and moderate to steep slopes. 
Soils typically more resistant to erosion include those that occupy low relief areas, are well vegetated, and 
have high infiltration capacity and internal permeability. Approximately 36 percent of all soils that would 
be affected by the Project are highly susceptible to erosion by water. 

Of the soils along the B-Line, about 45 percent (454.4 acres) would be susceptible to erosion by 
water. Along the BEI Lateral, about 16 percent (0.7 acre) of the soils would be susceptible to erosion 
from water. Along the IID Lateral, 10 percent (36.4 acres) of the soils would be susceptible to erosion 
from water. Because the majority of the terrain in the areas that exhibit a high potential for water erosion 
is relatively flat, erosion by water is not expected to be a significant concern. 

Erosion Potential from Wind - Wind erosion processes are less affected by slope angles. Wind- 
induced erosion often occurs on dry, fine-textured soil where vegetative cover is sparse and strong winds 
are prevalent. About 26 percent of all soils that would be affected by the Project are susceptible to wind 
erosion. 


Sixteen percent (162.9 acres) of the soils that would be affected by the B-Line would be 
susceptible to wind erosion, while none along the BEI Lateral would be susceptible. About 53 percent 
(191.7 acres) of the soils along the IID Lateral route exhibit a high potential for erosion by wind. 


4-31 




TABLE 4.2.2-1 


Soil Characteristics Associated with the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 


Facility/Mileposts 

Map Unit 
Identifiers (MUID) 

Affected 
Acres a 

High Water Erosion 
Potential (acres) b 

High Wind Erosion 
Potential (acres) b 

Potential for Shallow 
Bedrock (acres) b 

B-Line 

0.0-11.4 

CA653 

145.1 

20.4 c 

5.1 c 

0.0 c 

11.4-22.3 

CA654 

138.7 

19.1 

24.2 

11.5 

22.3-24.1 

CA927 

22.9 

19.1 

0.0 

1.3 

24.1 -26.6 

CA653 

31.8 

25.5 

6.4 

0.0 

26.6 - 26.9 

CA911 

3.8 

2.5 

1.3 

2.5 

26.9 - 27.7 

CA927 

10.2 

8.9 

0.0 

0.0 

27.7 - 28.2 

CA653 

6.4 

2.5 

0.0 

6.4 

28.2 - 28.5 

CA909 

3.8 

2.5 

1.3 

0.0 

28.5-31.0 

CA653 

33.1 

11.5 

1.3 

29.3 

31.0-32.0 

CA653 

11.5 

10.2 

2.5 

0.0 

32.0 - 57.8 

CA927 

328.4 

292.7 

0.0 

16.5 

57.8 - 79.8 

CA601 

280.0 

39.5 

120.9 

0.0 

B-Line Subtotal 


1,015.6 

454.4 

162.9 

67.5 

BEI Lateral 

0.0-0.6 

CA653 

4.4 

0.7 

0.0 

0.0 

IID Lateral 

0.0-0.6 

CA601 

5.6 d 

0.8 

2.4 

0.0 

0.6-6.9 

CA921 

61.3 d 

0.0 

61.3 

0.0 

6.9-11.7 

CA604 

46.5 d 

0.0 

0.0 

0.0 

11.7-12.1 

CA921 

3.1 

0.0 

3.1 

0.0 

12.1 - 19.7 

CA604 

55.1 

0.0 

0.0 

0.0 

19.7-23.0 

CA921 

24.1 

0.0 

24.1 

0.0 

23.0-26.1 

CA604 

22.5 

0.0 

0.0 

0.0 

26.1 -26.6 

CA921 

3.6 

0.0 

3.5 

0.0 

26.6-27.8 

CA604 

8.7 

0.0 

0.0 

0.0 

27.8-28.3 

CA606 

3.6 

4.1 

0.0 

0.0 

28.3-32.9 

CA603 

33.5 

0.0 

33.5 

0.0 

32.9 - 34.9 

CA606 

14.5 

14.3 

0.0 

0.0 

34.9 - 37.3 

CA603 

17.5 

0.0 

17.7 

0.0 

37.3 - 39.3 

CA606 

14.5 

14.4 

0.0 

0.0 

39.3-41.7 

CA603 

17.5 

0.0 

17.6 

0.0 

41.7-42.1 

CA606 

2.9 

2.8 

0.0 

0.0 

42.1 -45.7 

CA603 

26.2 

0.0 

28.5 

0.0 

IID Lateral Subtotal 


360.7 

36.4 

191.7 

0.0 

Total Acres 


1,380.7 

491.5 

354.6 

67.5 


Affected acres were calculated using a 105-foot-wide construction right-of-way for the B-Line and a 60-foot-wide 
construction right-of-way for the BEI and IID Laterals unless otherwise noted. Aboveground facilities, extra workspaces, 
and access roads are not included. 

It was assumed that the frequency of occurrence of each individual component soil series along the pipeline route within 
each MUID is the same as its percent composition within the MUID. 

0 Does not include soils in that portion of the route where the pipeline would be within the road or road shoulder. 

d Based on an 80-foot-wide construction right-of-way. 

Sources: STATSGO Database; Imperial Irrigation District 1967; U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service 1974; 
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service 1980. 


4-32 





Shallow Bedrock - Soils were evaluated to identify areas as containing shallow bedrock (hard 
bedrock within 5 feet of the soil surface). The presence of shallow bedrock could indicate the need for 
blasting. About 5 percent of all soils that would be affected by the Project have the potential for shallow 
bedrock. All of these areas occur along the B-Line route. There is the potential for about 7 percent (67.5 
acres) of the soils along the B-Line route to exhibit bedrock at a depth of less than 5 feet; however, based 
on past construction activity associated with the A-Line, shallow bedrock that would require blasting is 
expected to be encountered only at about MP 29.5. None of the soils along the BEI and IID Laterals have 
the potential for shallow bedrock. 

Prime Farmland - The NRCS (2003) defines prime farmland as “land that has the best 
combination of physical and chemical characteristics for producing food, feed, fiber, and oilseed crops.” 
This designation includes cultivated land, pasture, woodland, or other lands that are either used for food 
or fiber crops, or are available for these uses. Urbanized land, built-up land, and open water cannot be 
designated as prime farmland. Prime farmland typically contains few or no rocks, has an adequate and 
dependable water supply, is permeable to water and air, is not excessively erodible or saturated with water 
for long periods, and is not subject to frequent, prolonged flooding during the growing season. Soils that 
do not meet the above criteria may be considered prime farmland if the limiting factor is mitigated (e.g., 
by draining or irrigating). Additionally, the CDC designates farmlands of Statewide and local 
importance. Farmland of Statewide importance is similar to prime farmland but with minor 
shortcomings, such as greater slopes or less ability to store soil moisture. Land must have been used for 
production of irrigated crops at some time during the 4 years prior to the mapping date. Farmland of local 
importance is designated as land of importance to the local agricultural economy as determined by each 
county's board of supervisors and a local advisory committee. Table 4.2.2-2 lists areas of prime farmland 
and farmlands of Statewide and local importance by milepost and quantifies the acres that would be 
affected by the Project. A total of 87.2 acres of prime farmland and farmlands of Statewide and local 
importance would be affected by the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project. 

Aboveground Facilities 

Modifications at the Ehrenberg Compressor Station, including the proposed pig receiver, would 
be completed within the existing fenceline and would not require additional land. Extra workspace, 
however, would be required outside of the fenceline to install a header pipe associated with the pig 
receiver. Use of this extra workspace would temporarily affect about 0.7 acre of soils. Modifications at 
the adjacent El Paso Meter Station would be completed within the fenceline and would not affect 
additional soil resources. The soils associated with these sites are silt loams, sandy loams, and sands that 
may exhibit a slight potential for erosion. The majority of these soils are classified as prime farmland. 

The Blythe Meter Station would affect about 4.3 acres of land for construction and operation. 
The soils associated with the meter station site consist of fine, sandy, and loamy soils that are well- to 
excessively well-drained. This area is mapped as farmland of local importance but is not currently used 
for agriculture. There is a 35-year program in the PVID that transfers water to the Metropolitan Water 
District (MWD) and has put much of the farmland in the valley into rotating fallow (MWD 2005). 

The pig launcher and receiver proposed for Rannells Trap would require an expansion of the 
existing site by 0.3 acre during construction and operation. Soils at this location consist of moderately 
level well-drained sands and loams. These soils are not designated as prime farmland or farmlands of 
Statewide or local importance. 


4-33 




TABLE 4.2.2-2 

Prime Farmland and Farmlands of Statewide and Local Importance Affected by the 

North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 


La Paz County 

Riverside County 

Imperial County 


Facility/Designation Mileposts 

Mileposts 

Mileposts 

Total Acres a 

B-Line 




Prime Farmland 0.0-0.2 

0.8-5.4, 5.5-11.4 


47.0 

Farmland of Statewide 

Importance 

2.2-5.4, 5.5-11.6 


18.4 

Farmland of Local 

0.3-0.8, 11.7-16.8, 17.0- 

22.3-22.5, 23.4-23.5, 

0.0 

Importance 

Subtotal B-Line 

BEI Lateral 

Prime Farmland 

Farmland of Statewide 

Importance 

19.8, 20.2-21.6, 22.1-22.2 

23.9-24.4, 24.5-25.0 

65.4 

0.0 

0.0 

Farmland of Local 

Importance 

Subtotal BEI Lateral 

IID Lateral 

0.0-0.5 


0.1 

0.1 

Prime Farmland 


27.9- 28.2, 28.9-29.9, 

30.1- 30.5, 30.9-31.1, 
32.3-33.0, 33.3-34.2, 

34.9- 35.1, 37.2-38.7, 

39.1- 39.3, 39.5-39.8, 
40.5-41.1,42.3-43.3 

8.6 

Farmland of Statewide 

Importance 


28.2- 28.9, 29.9-30.1, 
30.5-30.9, 31.1-32.3, 
33.0-33.3, 34.2-34.9, 

35.1- 37.2, 38.7-39.1, 

39.3- 39.5, 39.8-40.5, 

41.1- 42.3, 43.3-46.0 

13.1 

Farmland of Local 

Importance 

Subtotal IID Lateral 

Total 


9.3-9.7 b ' c , 12.9-13.9 b c 

0.0 

21.7 

87.2 

Acreage includes pipeline construction right-of-way, extra workspaces, and 
were used to calculate acres. 

access roads. Actual rights-of-way widths 

Although mapped as "farmland of local importance," this area is not farmed land and is open desert. 
c Located on the north side of Evan Hewes Highway. 

Source: California Department of Conservation 1995a,b. 



Modifications at the Ogilby Meter Station, including the proposed odorant facility and pig 
launcher and receiver, would affect about 0.4 acre of soils outside the existing fenced facility during 
construction and operation. The tap to the B-line and pig launcher associated with the IID Lateral would 
affect 0.2 acre of soils for the construction and operation of these facilities. The soils in the vicinity of the 
Ogilby Meter Station and the B-Line tap and pig launcher sites consist of desert pavement, clay loams, 
loams, sandy clay loams, and sandy loams. These soils may be limited by a slight potential for erosion. 
No prime farmland or farmlands of Statewide or local importance would be affected at these sites. 

The El Centro Meter Station and pig receiver would affect about 2.5 acres of soils during 
construction and about 0.2 acre of soils during operation, all located within the existing fenceline of the 
IID El Centro Power Generating Station. The soils associated with these facility sites consist of fine silty 


4-34 







to coarse loamy soils. No prime farmland or farmlands of Statewide or local importance would be 
affected by these facilities. 

Pipe Storage and Contractor Yards 

All four proposed pipe storage and contractor yards have been previously disturbed for 
industrial/commercial activities and some have been graveled and/or paved. 

4.2.3 General Impact and Mitigation 

Pipeline construction activities such as clearing, grading, trench excavation, backfilling, and the 
movement of construction equipment along the right-of-way may affect soil resources. Clearing removes 
protective vegetative cover and exposes the soil to the effects of wind, rain, and runoff, which increases 
the potential for soil erosion and sedimentation of sensitive areas. Grading, spoil storage, and equipment 
traffic can compact soil, reducing porosity and percolation rates and increasing runoff potential. 
Construction activities can also affect soil fertility and facilitate the dispersal and establishment of weeds. 

Erosion is a continuing, natural process that can be accelerated by human activities. Clearing, 
grading, and the movement of equipment on the right-of-way can accelerate the erosion process and, 
without adequate protection, result in discharges of sediment to wetlands and waterbodies and lower soil 
fertility. Factors that influence the rate of erosion include soil texture and structure, the length and 
percent of slope, vegetative cover, and rainfall or wind intensity. The most erosion-prone soils are 
generally bare or sparsely vegetated, non-cohesive, fine textured, and situated on moderate to steep 
slopes. Soils more resistant to erosion include those that are well vegetated, well structured with high 
percolation rates, and located on flat to nearly level terrain. 

Construction equipment operating and traveling on the construction right-of-way, especially 
during wet periods and on poorly drained soils, can compact the soil. Soil compaction can also result 
from the storage of heavy spoil piles on certain types of soil for extended periods of time. Soil 
compaction destroys soil structure, reduces pore space and the moisture holding capacity of the soil, and 
increases runoff potential. If unmitigated, compaction results in soils with a reduced revegetation 
potential and an increased erosion hazard. The degree of compaction depends on the moisture content 
and texture of the soil. Wet soils with fine clay textures are the most susceptible to compaction. 
Compaction of fine-grained sediments such as clays is of particular concern in areas where clay soils are 
accompanied by a high water table because it may contribute to subsidence or the loss of surface 
elevation due to removal of subsurface support. Although clay soils occur in the Imperial Valley, the 
water table is generally low along the B-Line and IID Lateral routes, ranging from 9 to more than 400 feet 
below ground along the B-Line and 20 to 310 feet below ground along the IID Lateral route. Therefore, 
increases in compaction levels or the occurrence of subsidence that could damage the pipeline are not 
anticipated. 

Construction activities such as grading, trenching, and backfilling can also cause mixing of soil 
horizons. Mixing of topsoil with subsoil, particularly in agricultural lands, dilutes the superior chemical 
and physical properties of the topsoil and lowers soil fertility and the ability of disturbed areas to 
revegetate successfully. Trenching of stony or shallow-depth-to-bedrock soils can bring stones or rock 
fragments to the surface. Soils with bedrock present at depths of 5 feet or less may require blasting, 
which also often results in excess rock being brought to the soil surface. Excess rocks on or near the soil 
surface could interfere with agricultural practices and hinder restoration of the right-of-way. 

A commentor expressed concern that the use of screened subsoil for padding material during 
pipeline installation could cause negative impacts on the soil’s revegetation potential. Screening subsoil 


4-35 


for padding material would result in a backfill material with less soil fines, and the resultant coarser 
textured soil would likely have less nutrient and water holding capacity, which could affect the 
revegetation potential of the soil. However, screened subsoil is only one option for padding material; 
imported sand or sandbags could also be used. For the A-line, North Baja used a combination of screened 
subsoil and sandbags as pipe padding material. Although North Baja did not provide the specific 
locations where pipe padding was required or where each method was used during construction of the A- 
Line, the B-line would cross about 5.3 miles of soils with the potential for shallow bedrock or rocky soils 
to be encountered where it is likely that pipe padding would be necessary. Soils with these characteristics 
are not anticipated along the IID Lateral. The pipe padding methods proposed for the North Baja Pipeline 
Expansion Project are the same as those used during the A-Line construction, and the results of 
revegetation monitoring for the A-Line do not indicate a reduction in the recruitment of native species 
over the trenchline. Moreover, native seedling recruitment was in some locations higher over the 
disturbed right-of-way than in the control plots off of the right-of-way. Revegetation of the A-Line is 
discussed in Section 4.5.3 and in North Baja’s CM&R Plan (see Appendix E). 

Construction can also facilitate the establishment of noxious weeds where none or few existed. 
The clearing of existing perennial vegetation provides an opportunity for weed species to invade the right- 
of-way, and the movement of equipment along the right-of-way could transport weed seed and plant parts 
from one location to another (see Section 4.5.5). The seriousness of these effects would depend on the 
prevalence of weeds in the area of the pipeline route, the type of weed and its method of reproduction and 
dispersal, and the weed’s effect on current or future land use. 

No areas of contaminated soils are expected to be crossed by the Project; however, all of the soils 
crossed by the Project would be susceptible to contamination from spills or leaks of fuels, lubricants, and 
coolants from construction equipment. Although these impacts would typically be minor because of the 
low frequency and volumes of these occurrences, the introduction of these contaminants to soils can 
adversely affect productivity. 

The impact of construction on soils can be effectively minimized through the use of erosion 
control and revegetation plans such as the FERC’s Plan. To minimize impacts on soils associated with 
this Project, North Baja developed its CM&R Plan that includes the portions of the FERC’s Plan that are 
relevant to the Project area and Project-specific measures developed in consultation with the BLM, the 
FWS, and the CDFG that address the special issues associated with construction and restoration in an arid 
environment. The CM&R Plan is included in Appendix E and consists of three parts as discussed below. 

Desert Restoration Plan - This plan identifies the unique natural characteristics of the Project area 
and describes the procedures that were successful during construction of the A-Line that would be 
implemented during construction of the B-Line to preserve and restore habitat values affected by pipeline 
construction in the desert environment. The Desert Restoration Plan also summarizes the results of North 
Baja’s post-construction revegetation and weed control monitoring that was conducted for the A-Line. 

Upland Erosion and Sediment Control - This includes portions of the FERC’s Plan that are 
relevant to the Project area and that are designed to minimize Project-related construction impacts on soils 
and minimize erosion. 

Wetlands and Waterbodies - This includes portions of the FERC’s Procedures that are relevant to 
the Project area and are designed to minimize Project-related disturbance to waterbodies and wetlands. 

The Desert Restoration Plan and the Upland Erosion and Sediment Control sections of the 
CM&R Plan pertain to construction-related impacts on soils and provide mitigation measures that North 
Baja would implement to reduce these impacts during construction. These measures include: 


4-36 





• restricting the construction right-of-way width for the B-Line to 105 feet and further 
reducing the width of the right-of-way in areas with high concentrations of native trees; 

• restricting the construction right-of-way width for the IID Lateral to 80 feet where the 
lateral would be parallel to existing powerlines and to 60 feet where the lateral would be 
installed between a powerline and a road or within or abutting the traveled portion of 
county roads; 

• preserving the native seed bank by segregating topsoil to a depth of 2 to 8 inches in non- 
agricultural areas where grading would be conducted and redistributing material over the 
right-of-way during cleanup; 

• preserving and redistributing cut vegetation over the right-of-way; 

• restricting grading and crushing or cutting of vegetation where possible, leaving rootstock 
and minimizing soil disturbance; 

• imprinting areas with a sheepsfoot or similar device to provide indentations to catch 
water/seed and anchor native plant material that has been respread over the right-of-way, 
thereby aiding in natural revegetation and erosion control; 

• segregating and redistributing topsoil to its actual depth up to 2 feet in agricultural areas; 

• maintaining water flow in crop irrigation systems, unless shutoff is coordinated with 
affected parties; 

• testing for and alleviating compacted soils in agricultural and residential areas (details 
regarding North Baja’s compaction testing plans are included in its CM&R Plan [see 
Appendix E] and discussed below); 

• implementing procedures to prevent or minimize the spread of noxious weeds or other 
undesirable species by limiting disposal of plant materials to suitable areas and cleaning 
of clearing and grading equipment before entering native species areas; and 

• placing intact salvaged plant materials or rock at specific locations where visual blocking 
would be employed to discourage use of the pipeline right-of-way by unauthorized 
vehicles. 

The CM&R Plan modifies or omits several measures of the FERC’s Plan because portions of the 
FERC’s Plan are not applicable due to the arid climate crossed by the pipeline route. North Baja states 
that the arid climatic conditions in the Project area would limit the use or decrease the practical 
effectiveness of many traditional erosion control measures. For example. North Baja does not propose to 
install temporary erosion controls because of the level topography along most of the route and the stony 
soil where slopes are somewhat steeper along portions of the B-Line route east of SR 78. In the Project 
area, rainfall amounts average less than 5 inches annually. The infrequent rain events often occur in 
intense cloudbursts that result in flash flooding, which renders typical erosion controls (silt fence, hay 
bales, etc.) ineffective. 

The Agency Staffs have reviewed North Baja’s CM&R Plan and generally agree with the level of 
mitigation proposed and the appropriateness of the differences between the CM&R Plan and the FERC’s 
Plan. Additionally, while the BLM, the FWS, and the CDFG were consulted during development of the 


4-37 


CM&R Plan for the A-Line, it is possible that these agencies may include additional construction or 
mitigation measures when issuing permits and agreements for the proposed Project, including the 
CDFG’s SAA (see Section 4.3.3.5). 

It is also possible that the CRWQCB may impose additional requirements because North Baja’s 
proposal to eliminate the use of temporary erosion control measures is not consistent with the general 
requirements of the CRWQCB’s Storm Water Construction Permit. Those general requirements, 
however, were not specifically designed for pipeline construction in extremely arid environments such as 
the Project area. North Baja states that the CRWQCB and other agencies authorized the elimination of 
temporary erosion control measures during construction of the A-Line and, therefore, it believes its 
proposal to eliminate temporary erosion control measures during construction of the proposed Project will 
be authorized as well. North Baja has not completed consultations with the CRWQCB regarding the 
requirements for the Project. The CRWQCB could impose additional requirements, including the use of 
temporary erosion control measures, as part of its permitting process. Before construction, North Baja 
would be required to develop a SWPPP that complies with its CRWQCB permit requirements. In 
accordance with the CM&R Plan, North Baja would prepare and submit an updated CM&R Plan to the 
Agency Staffs before construction if necessary to incorporate any additional requirements of Federal, 
State, and local permits. 

Although revegetation of the disturbed areas in native desert habitats would be slow, the rate of 
revegetation would be primarily attributable to the arid climate. Artificial revegetation is not practical on 
a large scale due to the extremely arid conditions. If North Baja implements its CM&R Plan, the Project 
would not result in significantly increased erosion rates and a reduction of soil productivity by 
compaction or soil mixing to a level that would prevent successful rehabilitation and eventual re¬ 
establishment of vegetative cover to the recommended or preconstruction composition and density. 
Further, if the mitigation measures in the CM&R Plan that pertain to agricultural areas are implemented, 
the Project would not result in a significant reduction in agricultural productivity for longer than 3 years 
as a result of soil mixing, structural damage, or compaction. 

The CM&R Plan includes the measures of the FERC’s Plan to mitigate potential soil compaction 
in residential and agricultural areas. The CM&R Plan also includes a measure to conduct compaction 
testing and alleviate compaction along the IID Lateral if fine-textured soils, as identified by the El or the 
BLM, are encountered. The CM&R Plan does not, however, specify the types of soils that would be 
considered fine-textured. North Baja states that compaction did not occur during construction of the A- 
Line and does not propose to conduct compaction testing after construction of the B-Line. Although the 
STATSGO data do not identify compaction-prone soils along the B-Line, compaction in desert 
environments is recognized as a significant impediment to successful revegetation. Furthermore, the 
BLM commented that there are some dead or dying trees at the edge of the construction work area for the 
A-Line that it believes may be a result of soil compaction that occurred during construction of the A-Line. 
Therefore, the Agency Staffs recommend that: 

• North Baja shall consult with the BLM to identify areas where compaction may 
have occurred during construction of the A-Line and revise its CM&R Plan to list 
these locations. The revised CM&R Plan shall incorporate provisions for limited 
testing for compaction along the B-Line and the IID Lateral, list the specific soil 
types that would be tested, and describe specific measures to alleviate compaction if 
compaction is identified. North Baja shall file the revised CM&R Plan with the 
FERC and the CSLC for the review and written approval of the Director of the 
Office of Energy Projects (OEP) and the Executive Officer of the CSLC before 
construction. 


4-38 




Additional measures to mitigate construction-related impacts on soils are included in North 
Baja’s Dust Control Plan, which is described in Section 4.12.4 and provided in Appendix L. Fugitive 
dust disturbed by construction is a visible indication of soil loss through wind erosion. The Dust Control 
Plan outlines measures that would be implemented to control fugitive dust during construction. 

North Baja’s SPCC Plan specifies cleanup procedures to minimize the potential for soil 
contamination from spills or leaks of fuels, lubricants, and coolants used during construction (see 
Appendix F). Implementation of North Baja’s SPCC Plan would effectively reduce the potential impact 
on soils from spills of the hazardous materials used during construction and would not significantly 
increase the exposure of human or ecological receptors to potentially hazardous levels of chemicals. 

North Baja would employ full-time Els to ensure compliance with the CM&R Plan, the SPCC 
Plan, the SWPPPs, the Dust Control Plan, and other Project-specific plans and specifications during 
construction and restoration. At least two Els would be assigned to each construction spread. The El 
would have peer status with other activity inspectors and would have the authority to stop and order 
corrective actions for activities that violate the environmental conditions of the FERC Certificate or other 
authorizations. Implementation of North Baja’s proposed mitigation measures would reduce impacts on 
soil resources to less than significant levels. 

4.2.4 Site-specific Impact and Mitigation 
Pipeline Facilities 

As indicated in Table 4.2.2-1, about 7 percent of the soils that would be crossed by the B-Line 
may exhibit shallow depth to bedrock. Based on North Baja’s experience during construction of the A- 
line, shallow bedrock would be a concern primarily in the vicinity of MP 29.5 and would likely require 
blasting in order to excavate the trench through this area. Specific construction procedures would be used 
to minimize impact on soils. Excess rock would be removed from the upper 12 inches of soil to the 
extent practicable in cropland, hayfields, pastures, residential areas, and other areas at the landowner’s 
request. Excess rock would not be windrowed along the right-of-way unless written approval was 
obtained from landowners or land management agencies. All blasting would be done according to North 
Baja’s construction specifications for blasting (see Sections 2.3.2 and 4.1.2, and Appendix I). North 
Baja’s blasting specifications include detailed requirements for the use, storage, transportation, and 
handling of explosives; therefore, the Project would not significantly increase the exposure of human or 
ecological receptors to explosives. 

Other soil limitations that would be encountered during construction of the Project would include 

491.5 acres of soils with high water erosion potential. The majority of these soils would occur along the 
B-Line (454.4 acres), with 0.7 acre affected along the BEI Lateral, and 36.4 acres affected along the IID 
Lateral. In addition, a total of 354.6 acres of soils along the B-Line (162.9 acres) and IID Lateral (191.7 
acres) routes exhibit high wind erosion potential. As discussed in Section 4.2.3, implementation of the 
mitigation measures outlined in North Baja’s CM&R Plan and Dust Control Plan would satisfactorily 
minimize and mitigate construction-related effects on these soils to less than significant levels. 

Comments were received during the scoping process that reported increased erosion along the 
restored A-Line right-of-way and requested that culverts be installed where dry washes cross Stallard 
Road. A review of the affected areas indicates that the specific erosion events were not related to the 
pipeline right-of-way but rather were the result of high intensity runoff in wash areas due to storm-related 
events. The installation of culverts where washes are crossed by Stallard Road would be an issue to be 
addressed with Riverside County, which is the agency that has jurisdiction over the road. However, the 


4-39 


BLM recently identified various degrees of erosion along the A-line in steeply sloped areas south of 
Stallard Road. North Baja would work with the BLM to correct these areas. 

The IID Lateral would cross the ISDRA between MPs 0.0 and 7.0. The sand dunes consist of 
loose wind-blown sand. North Baja would cross portions of this area in association with the HDDs of the 
two All-American Canal crossings; however, the portion of this area between the two canals would be 
crossed using conventional overland construction methods. Crossing this area would require a wider 
trench to be excavated because trench walls in unconsolidated, unstable soils tend to collapse. Despite the 
need for a wider trench, North Baja anticipates that it would be able to construct through this area within 
its proposed 80-foot-wide construction right-of-way. Therefore, the presence of unconsolidated and 
unstable soils would not result in the need for a significantly wider construction right-of-way. 

The loose sandy soil conditions in this area could increase the potential for pipe exposure. North 
Baja proposes to bury the IID Lateral 6 feet deep between MPs 2.7 and 5.7, which includes the area most 
susceptible to blowing/shifting sands. This added depth of cover would reduce the potential for pipe 
exposure; therefore, the presence of unconsolidated and unstable soils would not result in an increased 
potential for pipe exposure during operations. 

Because a significantly wider construction right-of-way would not be required and North Baja’s 
proposal to increase the pipeline depth would reduce the potential for pipeline exposure, impacts related 
to the unconsolidated and unstable soils crossed would be less than significant. 

A significant impact on irrigation systems is not anticipated. With the exception of Rannells 
Drain, irrigation drains and canals would not be affected by construction because they would be crossed 
either by boring underneath the culverts along 18th Avenue or by installing the pipeline between the drain 
culvert and the road. Additionally, North Baja would contact landowners in the Palo Verde and Imperial 
Valleys regarding the location of other irrigation systems that could be affected during construction and 
would maintain water flow in these systems or coordinate disruption of irrigation flow or any shutoff 
times with the affected landowners. Although Rannells Drain would be open cut and disturbed, the 
impact would be temporary and mitigated by restoring the banks and bed of the drain to their original 
configurations and by stabilizing the banks of the drain with erosion control fabric upon completion of 
pipeline construction. Implementation of these mitigation measures would reduce impacts on irrigation 
systems and Rannells Drain to less than significant levels. 

Between MPs 0.0 and 0.2 and MPs 0.8 and 11.6, the B-Line would cross soils designated as 
prime farmland and farmland of Statewide importance. Soils designated as farmland of local importance 
would be crossed at numerous locations along the B-Line although most of these areas occur in areas of 
native desert habitat that are not used for agricultural purposes. In total, 65.4 acres of designated 
farmland would be temporarily affected along the B-Line. These impacts would be temporary and no 
permanent impacts on prime farmland or farmlands of Statewide or local importance would occur in 
association with the construction and operation of facilities associated with the B-Line facilities. 

Along the BEI Lateral, farmland of local importance was identified between MPs 0.0 and 0.5 and 
at the Blythe Meter Station site; however, this land is fallow and not currently used for agricultural 
purposes. Construction of the Blythe Meter Station would result in the permanent conversion of about 
4.3 acres of farmland of local importance to an industrial use. This loss would be much less than 0.1 
percent of the agricultural lands in the Palo Verde Valley and would be less than significant. 

Soils designated as prime farmland and farmland of Statewide importance would be crossed at 
numerous locations along the IID Lateral between MPs 27.9 and 46.0, while farmland of local importance 
would be affected between MPs 9.3 and 9.7 and MPs 12.9 and 13.9. In total, about 21.7 acres of soils 


4-40 


identified as prime farmland or farmlands of Statewide or local importance would be disturbed during 
construction. No permanent impacts on prime farmland or farmlands of Statewide or local importance 
would occur in association with the construction and operation of the facilities associated with the IID 
Lateral. 


North Baja would avoid significant impact on prime farmland or farmlands of Statewide or local 
importance by locating the B-Line and IID Lateral facilities in road shoulders adjacent to agricultural 
areas. Impacts that would occur on these soils and other active farmlands would be mitigated by 
segregating 1 to 2 feet of topsoil before installation of the pipeline and reapplying topsoil over the surface 
of the right-of-way during restoration as outlined in the CM&R Plan (see Appendix E). In addition, 
North Baja would implement a post-construction crop monitoring program to maintain the level of 
production of the affected soils. The program would evaluate crop productivity and success for a period 
of at least 2 years following construction. North Baja would prepare activity reports during this period 
documenting any problems identified by North Baja or the landowner and describing corrective actions 
taken to remedy these problems. These reports would be submitted to the FERC and the CSLC on a 
quarterly basis, as stipulated in the CM&R Plan. The FERC and CSLC staffs would also monitor the 
right-of-way after construction. If after 2 years it is determined that cropland crossed by the pipeline has 
not been restored successfully, North Baja would implement additional restoration measures. 
Implementation of North Baja’s CM&R Plan would reduce impacts on agricultural land to less than 
significant levels. 

For the portions of the Project that cross BLM lands, the BLM would need to assess potential 
impacts on rangeland health resulting from construction of the Project. One of the attributes included in 
the rangeland health assessment is soil/site stability (i.e., the capacity of the site to limit redistribution and 
loss of soil resources by wind and water [Pellant et al. 2005]). As discussed above, soil disturbance 
during pipeline construction could expose the soils to the erosional forces of wind and water thus 
affecting soil stability. Implementation of erosion control measures and the revegetation plan contained 
in North Baja’s CM&R Plan (see Section 4.2.3 and Appendix E) would effectively mitigate impacts on 
soil and avoid impacts on rangeland health. 

4.2.5 Arrowhead Alternative 

The facilities associated with the Arrowhead Alternative would affect the same MUID (CA653) 
that would be affected by the B-Line and the BEI Lateral in northern Riverside County. This MUID 
consists of sandy loams, silty clay loams, and silty clays. 

The Arrowhead Extension would affect about 3.6 acres of soils that exhibit a high potential for 
erosion by water, while less than 1.0 acre of soils exhibit a high potential for erosion by wind. Although 
analysis of the soils data indicates the potential for erosion, the Arrowhead Extension would cross 
relatively flat terrain, which would reduce the potential for erosion by water. Additionally, almost half of 
the proposed Arrowhead Extension would be placed in the road shoulder of Arrowhead Boulevard and 
would be covered by pavement following construction, thereby eliminating any post-construction erosion 
potential from water or wind associated with that portion of the pipeline. None of the soils that would be 
affected have the potential for shallow bedrock. About 1.1 miles of the Arrowhead Extension would 
cross agricultural land temporarily affecting about 16.1 acres of prime farmland and farmland of 
Statewide importance. 

Construction of the pig launcher, taps, and crossover piping would permanently affect 0.8 acre of 
prime farmland and farmland of Statewide importance. The Blythe-Arrowhead Meter Station and pig 
receiver would be within the existing SoCal Gas Blythe Compressor Station site and would not affect 
farmland soils. 


4-41 


North Baja would implement the mitigation measures included in its CM&R Plan and described 
in Sections 4.2.3 and 4.2.4 to minimize construction-related impacts on soils. 

4.2.6 No Project Alternative 

Under the No Project Alternative, the FERC would deny North Baja’s application for a 
Certificate and a Presidential Permit amendment, the CSLC would deny North Baja’s application for an 
amendment to its right-of-way lease across California’s Sovereign and School Lands, and the BLM would 
deny North Baja’s application to amend its existing Right-of-Way Grant and obtain a Temporary Use 
Permit for the portion of the Project on Federal lands. The No Project Alternative means that the Project 
would not go forward and the Project-related facilities would not be installed. Accordingly, none of the 
potential environmental impacts identified for the construction and operation of the proposed Project 
would occur. 

Because the proposed Project is privately funded, it is unknown whether North Baja would fund 
another energy project in California. However, should the No Project Alternative be selected, the energy 
needs identified in Section 1.1 would likely be addressed through other means, such as through other 
LNG or natural gas-related pipeline projects. Such projects may result in potential environmental impacts 
of the nature and magnitude of the proposed Project as well as impacts particular to their respective 
configurations and operations; however, these impacts cannot be predicted with any certainty at this time. 


4-42 


4.3 


WATER RESOURCES 


4.3.1 Significance Criteria 

An adverse impact on groundwater would be considered significant and would require mitigation 
if Project construction or operation would: 

• alter the flow of groundwater to local springs or wetland areas; 

• interrupt or degrade groundwater used for private or municipal purposes; or 

• result in either short- or long-term violation of Federal, tribal, or State agency numerical 

water quality standards or water quality objectives. 

An adverse impact on surface waters would be considered significant and would require 
mitigation if Project construction or operation would: 

• result in either short- or long-term violation of Federal, tribal, or State agency numerical 
water quality standards or water quality objectives; 

• alter channel bed armoring, bank composition, or stream hydraulic characteristics such 
that it results in short- or long-term erosion or so that the banks of a waterway must be 
armored to reduce short- or long-term erosion; 

• cause the resuspension of contaminated bottom sediments that would degrade the quality 
of water downstream in violation of Federal, tribal, or State agency water quality 
standards; 

• result in increased sedimentation that adversely affects the operation of irrigation water 
control structures, gates, or valves or the quality of municipal water supply reservoirs; 

• reduce streamflow quantity where such a flow change would significantly damage either 
beneficial uses or aquatic life; 

• increase the potential for flooding outside the stream channel; 

• place permanent structures within the 100-year floodplain that would be damaged by 
flooding; 

• increase soil or wind erosion rates or sedimentation such that degradation of water quality 
standards would result; or 

• degrade the integrity of structures, such as (bridges, pipelines, and utilities) due to erosion 
and improper conveyance of stormwater during construction and operation. 

4.3.2 Groundwater Resources 

4.3.2.1 Existing Groundwater Resources 

Groundwater in the vicinity of the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project is primarily derived 
from unconsolidated to poorly consolidated alluvial sediments consisting of gravel, silt, sand, and clay 


4-43 


associated with a complex system of basin-fill deposits (FERC and CSLC 2002, Planert and Williams 
1995, Robson and Banta 1995). Many desert basins are characterized by broad alluvial fans and plains 
sloping to playas, creating closed drainage basins that are usually dry. Hydrologic characteristics within 
these desert basins can differ considerably from basin to basin and within basins. The majority of the 
groundwater underlying the proposed facilities is derived from imported water from the Colorado River 
that is used for irrigation. Other local uses of groundwater in the Project area include industrial and 
commercial processes and municipal and domestic water supplies. Small amounts of groundwater may 
also be found in the underlying bedrock where it collects in fractures or weathered areas, but this 
groundwater is not considered a primary source. 

No EPA-designated sole-source aquifers would be crossed by the proposed Project (EPA 2005, 
Federal Emergency Management Agency [FEMA] 2005). The nearest sole-source aquifer is the Ocotillo- 
Coyote Aquifer, which is approximately 42 miles west of the terminus of the IID Lateral. No known 
municipal/public water supply sources, wellhead protection areas, or springs would be crossed (Langer et 
al. 1984). 

B-Line and BEI Lateral 

The Colorado River Aquifer underlies the majority of the B-Line, BEI Lateral, and associated 
aboveground facilities, including all of those portions within La Paz County, Arizona and Riverside 
County, California, and the northern portion of Imperial County, California. The B-Line would cross a 
watershed described as the Amos Ogilby and Imperial Hydrological Units in the southern portion of 
Imperial County from about MP 49.5 south to the All-American Canal. Groundwater recharge in these 
watersheds occurs within Colorado River floodplain alluvial deposits and is hydraulically connected to 
the river (FERC and CSLC 2002). Other minor sources of groundwater recharge include groundwater 
inflow from adjacent areas, infiltration of precipitation that falls to the ground surface, infiltration from 
irrigation ditches and canals, and local runoff from surrounding mountains. 

Groundwater depth in the vicinity of the B-Line and BEI Lateral is variable depending on the 
proximity of the area to the Colorado River or on drainage from irrigated lands (FERC and CSLC 2002). 
Depths to groundwater were derived from a combination of databases prepared by the USGS (2005) and a 
series of maps prepared by Langer et al. (1984). Groundwater levels ranging from 9 to 23 feet below the 
surface have been recorded in the vicinity of the B-Line in the Palo Verde Valley (approximately MPs 0.0 
to 12.0), which is close to the Colorado River. Groundwater in the Palo Verde Valley is artificially 
augmented by irrigation water diverted from the Colorado River. Further south along the B-Line, depth 
to groundwater tends to increase. Groundwater levels have been recorded at depths greater than 130 feet 
beneath the Palo Verde Mesa (approximately MPs 12.7 to 20.5), and depths of more than 400 feet below 
the land surface have been recorded near the Cargo Muchacho Mountains (approximately MP 66.8) and 
surrounding areas. Even further south along the B-Line, depths to groundwater gradually decrease and 
have been recorded as shallow as approximately 35 feet below the ground surface in the vicinity of the 
All-American Canal near MP 79.8 (USGS 2000). 

Groundwater quality is influenced by local geology, the effects of agricultural irrigation, and the 
chemical characteristics of the Colorado River (FERC and CSLC 2002). High concentrations of total 
dissolved solids ranging from 400 to 3,000 milligrams per liter (mg/1) cause the chemical quality of 
groundwater in the areas affected by the B-Line and BEI Lateral facilities to be relatively poor (EPA 
2006). 


4-44 


IID Lateral 


The IID Lateral would cross a terminal sink basin called the Salton Trough, which is a 
topographic and structural trough that extends from southeastern California into Mexico (Planert and 
Williams 1995). The Salton Trough is approximately 130 miles long and 70 miles wide and is a landward 
extension of the depression that is partially filled by the Gulf of California. The Salton Trough is further 
divided in California into two parts by the Salton Sea: the Imperial Valley to the south and the Coachella 
Valley to the north. The IID Lateral would pass entirely through the southern Imperial Valley, which is 
the largest area of desert irrigation in the United States. 

The most important source of groundwater recharge to the Imperial Valley is the Colorado River, 
with minor recharge resulting from groundwater inflow from adjacent areas (especially canal seepage), 
infiltration of runoff from surrounding mountains, and local runoff (Planert and Williams 1995). The 
salinity of the Colorado River is the most important water quality issue in the basin, with concentrations 
as high as 900 milligrams per liter (mg/1); major ionic constituents are calcium, sulfate, and chloride 
(USGS 2005). Groundwater within the Imperial Valley generally flows north toward the Salton Sea. 
Depths to groundwater range between 20 and 310 feet below the ground surface and generally tend to 
decrease moving from east to west (USGS 2005, California Department of Water Resources [CDWR] 
2005). 

4.3.2.2 General Impact and Mitigation 

Although activities associated with construction of the Project could affect groundwater 
resources, most potential impacts on groundwater resources would be avoided or minimized by the use of 
both standard and specialized construction techniques as described in Section 2.3. For the majority of the 
Project, groundwater levels are generally well below the land surface that would be affected by 
construction activities. However, shallow aquifers underlying certain construction areas (e.g., the Palo 
Verde Valley, portions of the route in the Cibola NWR, and the Imperial Valley) could experience minor 
impacts from clearing, grading, trenching, dewatering, soil mixing, and compaction that could 
temporarily alter overland flow and groundwater recharge. Near-surface soil mixing and compaction 
caused by heavy construction vehicles could also reduce the soil's ability to absorb water. These impacts 
would be temporary and minor and would not significantly affect groundwater resources or groundwater 
quality. In accordance with North Baja’s CM&R Plan, vegetation would be cleared only where 
necessary. After completion of construction, North Baja would restore the ground surface as closely as 
practicable to original contours and allow vegetation to regenerate to provide restoration of 
preconstruction overland flow and recharge patterns. Routine operation and maintenance of the Project 
facilities would not result in disturbance or contamination of groundwater resources. 

Unconfined aquifers and shallow groundwater areas could be vulnerable to contamination caused 
by inadvertent surface spills of petroleum or hazardous materials used during construction. Accidental 
spills and leaks of hazardous materials associated with equipment trailers; the refueling or maintenance of 
vehicles; and the storage of fuel, oil, and other fluids pose the greatest risk to groundwater resources. If 
not cleaned up, contaminated soils would continue to leach and add pollutants to groundwater long after a 
spill has occurred. Impacts associated with spills or leaks of hazardous liquids could be avoided or 
minimized by restricting the location of refueling and storage facilities and by requiring cleanup in the 
event of a spill or leak. 

North Baja’s SPCC Plan addresses preventive and mitigative measures that would be used to 
avoid or minimize the potential impact of petroleum or hazardous material spills during pipeline 
construction. Some pertinent measures in North Baja’s SPCC Plan include: 


4-45 


• proper storage and handling of containers and tanks, including storage of containers with 
hazardous liquids in secondary containment structures; 

• restricting liquid transfer, vehicle and equipment washing, and refueling within 100 feet 
of wetlands and waterbodies, 200 feet of water supply wells, and 400 feet of municipal or 
community water wells or protected wellhead or watershed areas; 

• training of all employees on the contents of the SPCC Plan; 

• maintaining emergency spill kits in all service vehicles; 

• periodic inspection of vehicles and equipment for leaks; 

• established release notification and emergency response procedures; and 

• proper disposal of contaminated materials and soils and replacement of excavated 
contaminated soil with clean soil. 

Implementation of North Baja’s CM&R and SPCC Plans would reduce the potential for 
construction or operation of the Project to result in either short- or long-term violation of Federal, tribal, 
or State agency numerical water quality standards or water quality objectives to less than significant 
levels. 


In locations where groundwater is close to the land surface (6 to 8 feet deep), the trench 
excavation could intersect the water table. In these areas, trench dewatering may be required. The 
potential effect on users of the aquifer would depend on the rate and duration of pumping and the location 
of the activity, but is expected to be minor. Pipeline construction activities within a particular location are 
typically completed within several days; consequently, potential impacts would be localized and 
temporary and water levels would be quickly re-established when backfilling is complete. However, 
alteration of the natural soil strata could potentially result in new groundwater migration pathways away 
from surface waterbodies. Implementation of North Baja’s CM&R Plan, which requires the use of trench 
breakers or installation of trench plugs at the edges of waterbodies, would eliminate these potential 
impacts; therefore, the potential for the Project to alter the flow of groundwater to local springs or wetland 
areas would be less than significant. 

During construction of the B-Line and the IID Lateral, substantial amounts of groundwater may 
be encountered in the vicinity of the Colorado River and near canal crossings. Additionally, substantial 
amounts of groundwater may be encountered along the IID Lateral in the agricultural areas from MPs 28 
to 46 near canal and drain crossings. To control the influx of groundwater into bore pits, the use of well 
points in addition to standard sump pump dewatering may be necessary. The water from these 
dewatering operations would be discharged to dewatering structures and/or otherwise filtered and 
discharged into field drains or canals. North Baja would obtain the necessary permits to perform these 
operations. Minor fluctuations in local groundwater levels may occur, but would be temporary and 
minor. 


Although no areas of known groundwater contamination would be affected by construction of the 
Project facilities, unanticipated, pre-existing contaminated groundwater could be encountered during 
construction. In the event contaminated groundwater or contaminated soils are encountered as evidenced 
by refuse and/or other debris in the trench, discoloration, odor, or other signs at these locations or other 
locations along the pipeline routes, additional observations for the presence of a chemical sheen, free 
product, and chemical odor would be made and recorded before any further construction activity. Field 


4-46 


observations would be conducted to determine the nature of the contamination, appropriate 
disposal/treatment options, and the need for sampling. If contaminated groundwater and/or soils are 
encountered, North Baja would stop work and consult with the appropriate agencies, including the 
CRWQCB and the Riverside and Imperial Counties Departments of Health on a plan to proceed. The 
plan would include provisions for characterizing the contaminants, appropriate health and safety measures 
for workers, and proper discharge of the groundwater. North Baja would notify the appropriate agencies 
of any discoveries of pre-existing contamination and would perform evaluations on the amount and 
composition of the contamination. Once the evaluations are completed, North Baja would coordinate 
with the appropriate agencies to determine appropriate actions and disposal of affected materials. 

4.3.2.3 Water Supply Wells 

A preliminary identification of water supply wells in the vicinity of the Project was conducted by 
contacting State agency staff and reviewing well location maps and databases at the CDWR and the 
USGS. Based on this review, 10 water supply wells would be within 150 feet of the centerline of the 
pipeline facilities (USGS 2005, CDWR 2005). All of these wells would be along the B-Line. Nine of the 
10 wells have no records of groundwater data after 2001 and are likely non-operational wells. The 
exception is well ID #007S023E14C019S at MP 2.5. Table 4.3.2-1 lists the wells within 150 feet of the 
B-Line by milepost and depicts the distance from the centerline and depth to groundwater. 


TABLE 4.3.2-1 


Water Wells Within 150 Feet of the Centerline of the Pipeline Facilities Associated 
with the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 

FacilityAA/ell ID# a 

Milepost 

Distance from Centerline (feet) b 

Groundwater Depth (feet) 

B-Line 





007S023E14C019S 

2.5 

74 


12.4 

007S023E15A001S 

2.6 

116 


ND C 

007S023E08R001S 

4.5 

131 


ND 

007S023E17D002S 

5.4 

11 


ND 

007S022E12R001S 

6.5 

17 


ND 

007S022E14A001S 

7.4 

23 


ND 

007S022E10R001S 

8.5 

147 


ND 

007S022E15D001S 

9.4 

7 


ND 

007S022E17C001S 

11.0 

92 


ND 

007S022E18A001S 

11.6 

27 


ND 

BEI Lateral 


-None- 



IID Lateral 


-None- 




Uses township-range-section nomenclature based on the San Bernardino Base and Meridian. 

Accuracy of global positioning system data may be as high as +/- 30 meters depending on satellite coverage and 
geographic information system resolution. 

ND = No current groundwater data available for the period 2001 through 2006. 


During construction of the A-Line, only one well was identified within 150 feet of the proposed 
construction work area. This well, probably inactive based on lack of groundwater data since 2001, is 
north of 18th Avenue near MP 7.9 and is assumed to be associated with an existing residence. 

Potential impacts on wells within 150 feet of the construction work area could include: localized 
decreases in groundwater recharge rates, changes to overland water flow, contamination due to hazardous 
materials spills, decreased well yields, decreased water quality (such as an increase in turbidity or odor in 


4-47 






the water), interference with well mechanics, or complete disruption of the well. These impacts could 
result from trenching, equipment traffic, or blasting. 

Before construction, North Baja would conduct a field survey to verify the location of any water 
wells that are identified within 150 feet of the construction work area. With the landowner’s permission, 
North Baja would test these water wells before construction to determine baseline flow conditions as a 
means of determining any potential construction-related impacts. Where impacts are reported by 
landowners, North Baja would conduct post-construction water well tests. If it is determined that 
construction activities have impaired a well’s water quality or yield, North Baja would either provide 
bottled water for drinking and arrange for an alternate source of water (such as a water truck) for other 
household uses, temporarily relocate the landowner until the water supply is restored, or compensate the 
landowner for losses. If water quality or yield is permanently impaired as a result of construction 
activities, North Baja would arrange for a new well to be drilled or compensate the landowner. 

The potential for contaminating wells due to spills of petroleum or hazardous materials is 
generally low because of the relatively small volume of such materials present during construction. The 
potential for impacts would be further reduced by implementation of North Baja’s SPCC Plan as 
described in Section 4.3.2.2. 

As discussed previously, blasting is only anticipated near MP 29.5. No water wells have been 
identified within 0.5 mile of this location. Should additional water wells be identified in the vicinity of a 
location requiring blasting, North Baja’s use of proper blasting techniques, which would fracture bedrock 
only to the point necessary for removal, would limit the effect of the blast to a local area above the aquifer 
in the proximity of the trenchline (see Appendix I). Consequently, it is unlikely groundwater quality 
would be affected. 

In summary, no municipal uses of groundwater were identified within the vicinity of the North 
Baja Pipeline Expansion Project, and only 10 private wells have been identified within 150 feet of the 
proposed facilities. Because North Baja would implement the measures contained in its CM&R and 
SPCC Plans and would identify and monitor any water wells within 150 feet of the construction work 
area, the potential for the Project to interrupt or degrade groundwater used for private or municipal 
purposes is less than significant. 

4.3.2.4 Groundwater Uses During Construction 

During construction, water would be applied to road surfaces and disturbed areas as part of North 
Baja’s dust control measures (see Sections 4.2 and 4.11 and Appendix L). Water would also be used to 
conduct hydrostatic testing to verify the integrity of the pipeline facilities and the piping associated with 
aboveground facilities (see Section 2.3.1). A portion of the water that would be used for dust control 
activities and hydrostatic test water could be obtained from a well at the Ehrenberg Compressor Station 
site. This well is hydrologically connected to the Colorado River and, therefore, is discussed in Section 
4.3.3.4. 

4.3.3 Surface Water Resources 

4.3.3.1 Existing Surface Water Resources 

Pipeline Facilities 

The North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project would cross two watersheds: the Imperial Reservoir 
Watershed and the Salton Sea Watershed. The B-Line would cross the Imperial Reservoir Watershed 


4-48 


between MPs 0.0 and 49.5 and the Salton Sea Watershed between MPs 49.5 and 79.8, the BEI Lateral 
would lie entirely within the Imperial Reservoir Watershed, and the IID Lateral would lie entirely within 
the Salton Sea Watershed. Both watersheds have been classified as Category I watersheds in California’s 
Unified Watershed Assessment (NRCS 2005), which is part of the Clean Water Action Plan. Category I 
watersheds are high priority candidates for restoration activities to improve impaired water quality or 
other impaired natural resource goals, with an emphasis on aquatic systems. 

Surface waters are classified by the States by the identification of beneficial uses of surface 
waters. This identification is based strictly on documentation of the existence of those uses, which can 
also include potential future and intermittent uses. Such uses are protected by the States through the 
development of water quality objectives for those uses. The beneficial uses of surface waters in the 
Project area include agricultural irrigation; municipal and domestic water supply; industrial service 
supply; groundwater recharge; contact (e.g., swimming, wading, waterskiing) and non-contact (e.g., 
boating, beachcombing, hiking) recreation; freshwater fish habitat; wildlife habitat; and preservation of 
rare, threatened, or endangered species (CRWQCB 1994, NRCS 2005). The water quality of the surface 
waters in the Project area is generally poor; these waters are highly saline or alkaline because of the 
predominance of sedimentary rocks, high evaporation rates, and low precipitation. The primary purpose 
of the agricultural drains in the Project area is for the collection, transport, and storage of drainage waters 
from irrigated cropland to maintain adequate soil salinity balance for agriculture (CRWQCB 1994). 

All of the waterbodies within the Imperial Reservoir and Salton Sea Watersheds, including 
agricultural canals and drains, are listed by the California State Water Resources Control Board 
(CSWRCB) as impaired (California Environmental Protection Agency [CEPA] 2005). This impairment 
is due to elevated pesticide and selenium levels in fish tissues and toxic bioassay results that identified 
high pesticide levels in other aquatic organisms. Agricultural runoff from irrigation practices has been 
identified as the primary source of impairment (CEPA 2005), and contaminated sediments may exist in 
agricultural canals and drains from extensive pesticide use on irrigated croplands (CRWQCB 1999). 

Surface waters in the Project area consist of perennial rivers, man-made irrigation canals and 
drains, and desert dry washes. Occasional high-intensity rainfalls contribute to the highly turbid flows 
that are observed in streams and rivers in the region. Dry washes flow primarily during these 
precipitation events. Flash floods can be caused by intense, short periods of rainfall and can move large 
loads of sediment, gravel, and larger debris over wide areas of drainage canals and desert washes. 

A total of 2 perennial waterbodies, 70 irrigation canals and drains, and 265 dry desert washes 
would be crossed by the proposed pipeline facilities. Of these, the B-Line would cross 1 perennial 
waterbody (the Colorado River) and 31 irrigation canals and drains (including the All-American Canal). 
All 265 dry washes that would be crossed by the Project occur along the B-Line. The BEI Lateral would 
not cross any surface waters. The IID Lateral would cross 1 perennial waterbody (the Alamo River) and 
39 irrigation canals and drains, including the All-American Canal (two crossings) and the East Highline 
Canal. Table 4.3.3-1 lists the perennial waterbodies and irrigation canals and drains by milepost, type, 
crossing width, fishery classification, and proposed crossing method. The dry washes that would be 
crossed by the B-Line are listed in Appendix M. 


4-49 


TABLE 4.3.3-1 


Perennial Waterbodies, Canals, and Drains Crossed by the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 

Facility/ 

Approximate Crossing Width 

Milepost Waterbody Type (feet) Fishery Type Proposed Crossing Method 


B-Line 


0.2 

Colorado River 

Perennial 

790 

Warmwater 

HDD 3 

1.3 

D-10-13-42 E 

Delivery Canal 

9 

NC b 

Dry 0 

1.7 

D-10-13-45 E 

Delivery Canal 

15 

NC 

Dry 

1.9 

D-10-13-47E 

Delivery Canal 

15 

NC 

Dry 

2.2 

D-10-13-49E 

Delivery Canal 

15 

NC 

Dry 

2.3 

D-10-13(F) 

Canal 

40 

NC 

Dry 

2.7 

D-10-11-2N 

Delivery Canal 

2 

NC 

Dry 

2.9 

D-10-Siphon 48 

Canal 

15 

NC 

Dry 

3.2 

East Side Drain 

Drain 

2 

NC 

Dry 

3.4 

Goodman Drain 

Drain 

50 

NC 

Dry 

3.6 

D-Siphon-89 

Canal 

40 

NC 

Dry 

3.9 

Private 

Canal 

2 

NC 

Dry 

4.4 

D-19 

Canal 

15 

NC 

Dry 

4.7 

D-19-4N 

Delivery Canal 

2 

NC 

Dry 

5.2 

Lovekin Drain 

Drain 

30 

NC 

Dry 

5.4 

Private 

Canal 

2 

NC 

Dry 

5.9 

C-Siphon-56 

Canal 

42 

NC 

Dry 

6.9 

Central Drain 

Drain 

35 

NC 

Dry 

7.9 

C-05 Canal 

Canal 

17 

NC 

Dry 

8.2 

Private 

Canal 

9 

NC 

Dry 

8.9 

West Side Drain 

Drain 

40 

NC 

Dry 

9.5 

C-03 Canal 

Canal 

35 

NC 

Dry 

9.9 

C-03-64N 

Delivery Canal 

35 

NC 

Dry 

10.3 

C-03-16-3N Canal 

Delivery Canal 

40 

NC 

Dry 

10.5 

C-03-16 Canal 

Canal 

2 

NC 

Dry 

10.7 

C-03-16-6S 

Delivery Canal 

15 

NC 

Dry 

10.9 

C-03-16-1 

Canal Heading 

6 

NC 

Dry 

10.9 

C-03-16-8W 

Delivery Canal 

6 

NC 

Dry 

11.2 

Private 

Canal 

15 

NC 

Dry 

11.4 

Rannells Drain 

Drain 

60 

NC 

Open Cut 

11.4 

Private West Side of Drain 

Canal 

15 

NC 

Dry 

79.8 

BEI Lateral 

IID Lateral 

All-American Canal 

Canal 

- None- 

200 

NC 

HDD 

2.4 

All-American Canal 

Canal 

200 

NC 

HDD 

8.1 

All-American Canal 

Canal 

200 

NC 

HDD 

12.5 

All-American Canal Lateral 7 

Canal 

17 

NC 

Dry 

27.5 

East Highline 

Canal 

190 

NC 

HDD 

28.4 

Warren 2E 

Drain 

4 

NC 

Dry 

28.5 

Lateral 7 / Gate 183 

Canal 

3 

NC 

Dry 

29.1 

Lateral 7 / Gate 183A 

Canal 

2 

NC 

Dry 

29.4 

Warren 2C 

Drain 

3 

NC 

Dry 

31.4 

Warren 1 

Drain 

4 

NC 

Dry 

32.3 

Alamo 

Canal 

7 

NC 

Dry 

32.3 

Alamo River 

Perennial 

52 

NC 

Dry 

33.6 

Barbara Worth 

Drain 

3 

NC 

Dry 

33.9 

Lateral 12 

Canal 

6 

NC 

Dry 

34.5 

Ash Main 

Canal 

6 

NC 

Dry 

34.9 

Ash Lateral 30 

Canal 

6 

NC 

Dry 

35.9 

Ash Lateral 39 

Canal 

4 

NC 

Dry 

36.4 

Ash Lateral 39 (30A) 

Canal 

6 

NC 

Dry 


4-50 




TABLE 4.3.3-1 (cont'd) 

Perennial Waterbodies, Canals, and Drains Crossed by the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 


Facility/ 

Approximate Crossing Width 

Milepost Waterbody Type (feet) Fishery Type Proposed Crossing Method 


36.9 

Ash Lateral 34 

Canal 

6 

NC 

Dry 

37.2 

South Central 

Drain 

6 

NC 

Dry 

38.0 

Ash Lateral 33 

Canal 

6 

NC 

Dry 

38.2 

Ash Lateral 36/Gate 151 

Canal 

3 

NC 

Dry 

38.4 

Central 2A 

Drain 

3 

NC 

Dry 

38.4 

Ash Lateral 36/Gate 151C 

Canal 

3 

NC 

Dry 

38.9 

Central 2C 

Drain 

4 

NC 

Dry 

38.9 

Ash Lateral 15 

Canal 

6 

NC 

Dry 

38.9 

Unnamed 

Drain 

8 

NC 

Dry 

39.2 

Unnamed 

Drain 

7 

NC 

Dry 

39.2 

Ash Lateral 37 

Canal 

8 

NC 

Dry 

39.4 

Unnamed 

Drain 

12 

NC 

Dry 

39.4 

Ash 157 

Drain 

14 

NC 

Dry 

40.3 

Acacia 

Drain 

4 

NC 

Dry 

40.4 

Acacia 

Canal 

7 

NC 

Dry 

41.9 

Acacia Lateral 6A 

Canal 

3 

NC 

Dry 

42.2 

Unnamed 

Drain 

4 

NC 

Dry 

42.5 

Acacia Lateral 8 

Canal 

3 

NC 

Dry 

43.4 

Acacia 6A 

Drain 

6 

NC 

Dry 

44.1 

Alder Lateral 7 

Canal 

17 

NC 

Dry 

44.6 

Alder 

Canal 

11 

NC 

Dry 

44.8 

Central 3 

Drain 

6 

NC 

Dry 

45.6 

Dogwood 

Canal 

12 

NC 

Dry 


HDD = Horizontal directional drill. 

NC = Not classified. 

Dry crossings would include boring beneath the existing canals and drains that are enclosed inside drain culverts under 
18' h Avenue or installing the pipeline between the drain culvert and the road. 


4-51 





No potable water intake sources are within 3 miles downstream of the proposed waterbody 
crossings (Taylor 2005). However, the East Highline Canal delivers municipal water to the City of 
Holtville via an intake on Pear Canal (Mendez 2005), which is approximately 6 miles from where the IID 
Lateral would cross the East Highline Canal. 

Neither of the two perennial rivers (the Colorado River and the Alamo River) that would be 
crossed by the Project are listed on the Nationwide Rivers Inventory or recognized as State-designated 
scenic rivers (NRCS 2005). 

The North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project would cross floodplains at numerous locations along 
the B-Line and at a single location along the IID Lateral. No floodplains would be crossed by the BEI 
Lateral. The B-Line would cross 4.3 miles of FEMA-designated floodplains at 27 separate locations 
scattered between MPs 24.0 and 79.6. Seventeen of these locations coincide with dry wash crossings. 
The floodplain crossings vary in length from 0.02 mile to 0.77 mile with the majority of floodplain 
crossings less than 0.25 mile long. The IID Lateral would cross one FEMA-designated 100-year flood 
hazard area at the Alamo River crossing (ESRI & FEMA 2005, FEMA 2005). The only aboveground 
facility that would be in a floodplain is valve #7 on the B-Line. 

Aboveground Facilities 

There are no waterbodies at any of the proposed aboveground facility sites, and none of the 
aboveground facilities would be within a 100-year flood hazard area designated by the FEMA (ESRI & 
FEMA 2005). 

Pipe Storage and Contractor Yards 

Use of the proposed pipe storage and contractor yards would not affect surface waters. 

Access Roads 

Use of the access roads would not affect surface waters. 

4.3.3.2 General Impact and Mitigation 

Pipeline construction could affect surface waters in several ways. Clearing and grading of 
streambanks, in-stream trenching, trench dewatering, and backfilling could affect waterbodies through 
modification of aquatic habitat, increased sedimentation, increased turbidity, decreased dissolved oxygen 
concentrations, stream warming, or introduction of chemical contamination from fuels or lubricants. The 
crossing of irrigation canals could interrupt the flow of irrigation water, which could damage crops and 
reduce crop yields. 

Spoil placed in floodplains during pipeline construction could cause an increase in flood levels or 
could be washed downstream or be deleterious to aquatic life. The removal of floodplain vegetation 
could reduce the ability of the floodplain to slow flood flows and filter pollutants and suspended 
sediment, resulting in increased erosion. Occasional high-intensity rainfalls can result in flash flooding 
within the Project area and can move large loads of sediment, gravel, and larger debris. This flash 
flooding is typically confined to natural desert washes and manmade drainage canals within the Project 
area. All construction within floodplains would be temporary, lasting only a few months during clearing, 
grading, trenching, pipe stringing, welding, lowering in, backfilling, and restoration operations. North 
Baja states that it would manage spoil piles in accordance with the provisions of the CDFG’s SAA. For 
the A-Line, these provisions required that materials placed in seasonally dry portions of a stream that 


4-52 


could be washed downstream or could be deleterious to aquatic life must be removed before inundation 
by high flows. Dry washes are also regulated by the CRWQCB, which may impose additional 
stipulations regarding spoil pile management such as requiring North Baja to leave gaps in the spoil piles 
in dry washes so the washes remain open during construction. In accordance with its CM&R Plan (see 
Appendix E), North Baja would prepare and submit an updated CM&R Plan to the Agency Staffs before 
construction if necessary to incorporate any additional requirements of Federal, State, and local permits. 

Drainage canals would not be disturbed by construction. All trench spoil would be returned to 
the trench, and all disturbed areas would be restored to preconstruction contours. Additionally, North Baja 
would stabilize the right-of-way following construction. Because the Project would not add permanent 
fill in the floodplains, potential flood flows would not be displaced and long-term impacts are not 
anticipated. Valve #7 on the B-Line would be designed according to DOT standards outlined in Title 40 
CFR Part 192, which requires valves to be built on a concrete pad that protects the valves from potential 
flood or erosion damage. 

The greatest potential impact of pipeline construction on surface waters would result from the 
temporary suspension of sediments caused by in-stream construction or by erosion of cleared streambanks 
and rights-of-way. The extent of the impact would depend on sediment loads, stream velocity, turbidity, 
bank composition, and sediment particle size. These factors would determine the density and downstream 
extent of sediment migration. In-stream construction, particularly under flowing conditions, could cause 
the dislodging and transport of channel bed sediments, which could cause changes in downstream bottom 
contours and streamflow dynamics that could cause additional erosion and downstream sedimentation. 
Turbidity resulting from resuspension of sediments from in-stream construction or erosion of cleared 
right-of-way areas would reduce light penetration and photosynthetic oxygen production. In-stream work 
could also introduce chemical and nutrient pollutants from sediments if pollutants are present in the 
sediments at the crossing location and result in the movement of these pollutants to new locations 
downstream. Resuspension of deposited organic material and inorganic sediments could cause an 
increase in biological and chemical use of oxygen, resulting in reduced dissolved oxygen concentrations 
in the affected area. Lower dissolved oxygen concentrations could cause temporary displacement of 
motile organisms and may kill non-motile organisms within the affected area. Implementation of the 
measures described in North Baja’s CM&R Plan, such as placement of extra work areas, general crossing 
procedures, spoil pile placement and control, and trench dewatering, would reduce the potential for 
degradation of downstream water quality as a result of suspension of sediments to less than significant 
levels. 


Clearing and grading of streambanks would expose large areas of soil to erosional forces and 
would reduce the riparian vegetation along the cleared section of the stream. The use of heavy equipment 
for construction could cause compaction of near-surface soils, which could result in increased runoff into 
surface waterbodies. The increased runoff could transport additional sediment into the waterbodies, 
resulting in increased turbidity levels and sedimentation rates in the receiving waterbody. Erosion prior to 
right-of-way restoration and revegetation would be controlled through various procedures as described in 
North Baja’s CM&R Plan. These procedures would reduce the potential for erosion, via either wind or 
water, to less than significant levels. 

No alteration of existing drainage patterns would occur during construction that would result in 
significant erosion or flooding. The capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems, 
irrigation water control structures, and municipal water supply reservoirs would not be affected. The 
measures and best management practices in North Baja’s SWPPPs that would be prepared in accordance 
with the requirements of the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) and the CRWQCB 
would ensure that the Project would not violate narrative and numerical water quality standards or result 
in polluted runoff. 


4-53 


Refueling of vehicles and storage of fuel, oil, or other hazardous materials near surface waters 
and spills from equipment working in waterbodies could also create a potential for contamination in 
waterbodies. If a spill were to occur, immediate downstream users of the water could experience 
degradation in water quality. Acute and chronic toxic effects on aquatic organisms could also result from 
such a spill. Implementation of the measures in North Baja’s SPCC Plan (see Appendix F) would 
minimize the potential impact of a spill into surface waters during construction to less than significant 
levels. 

Waterbody Construction and Mitigation Procedures 

As discussed in Section 2.3, North Baja’s CM&R Plan includes the portions of the FERC’s 
Procedures that are relevant to protect waterbodies in the Project area. These measures include: 

• locating all extra work areas at least 50 feet away from waterbody boundaries, where 
topographic conditions permit; 

• limiting clearing of vegetation between extra work areas and the edge of the waterbody to 
the certificated construction right-of-way; 

• maintaining adequate flow rates to protect aquatic life and prevent the interruption of 
existing downstream uses; 

• restricting storage and refueling activities near surface waters; 

• restricting spoil placement and control near surface waters; 

• limiting use of equipment operating in the waterbody to that needed to construct the 
crossing; 

• adhering to timing restrictions on in-stream work; 

• requiring temporary erosion and sediment control at Rannells Drain and/or as required by 
regulatory agencies; 

• requiring bank stabilization and recontouring after construction; and 

• limiting use of herbicides or pesticides for right-of-way maintenance in or within 100 feet 
of a waterbody except as specified by the appropriate land management or State agency. 

North Baja would obtain waterbody crossing permits from the COE under section 10 of the 
Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 and section 404 of the CWA. North Baja would also obtain a section 401 
Water Quality Certification from the CRWQCB. In addition, North Baja would obtain an SAA (section 
1600 seq. of the California Fish and Game Code) from the CDFG (see Section 4.3.3.5). All construction 
activities at waterbody crossings would be in accordance with Federal, State, and local permit 
requirements. North Baja’s implementation of its CM&R Plan and these mitigation measures would 
reduce impacts on surface waters to less than significant levels. 

The majority of the waterbodies that would be crossed by the B-Line are dry washes that do not 
support fisheries, provide critical aquatic habitat, provide migratory passage for aquatic organisms, or 
have CRWQCB-designated recreation/high quality visual resource values. North Baja would cross these 
dry washes with typical cross-country construction methods using the same techniques that were 


4-54 



implemented to construct the A-Line. As discussed above, the spoil piles would be managed in 
accordance with the provisions of the CDFG’s SAA, which are expected to require that materials placed 
in seasonally dry portions of a stream that could be washed downstream or could be deleterious to aquatic 
life must be removed before inundation by high flows. Impacts on dry washes would be limited to the 
temporary alteration of beds and banks, loss of wildlife habitat, and possibly increased sediment load 
during initial storm events following construction. Discussions of impacts on the vegetation, wildlife, and 
special status species associated with these washes are included in Sections 4.5, 4.6, and 4.7, respectively. 

With one exception, North Baja would cross all flowing waterbodies using the HDD or bore 
method, or the pipeline would be installed between the drain culverts and a road bed. Specifically, North 
Baja proposes to cross the Colorado River, the All-American Canal, and the East Highline Canal using 
the HDD method, which is described in Section 2.3.2. These three waterbodies are greater than 100 feet 
wide at the crossing location and are discussed in Section 4.3.3.3. 

The only flowing waterbody proposed to be crossed using the open-cut method is Rannells Drain, 
which would be crossed by the B-Line at MP 11.4. The open-cut method is described in Section 2.3.2. 
Rannells Drain is an agricultural drain in the Palo Verde Valley that is periodically cleared of vegetation 
by the PVID. North Baja installed the A-Line in 2002 using the open-cut crossing method and the 
vegetation in the drain has fully recovered. The PVID has indicated it would be willing to perform 
maintenance clearing/dredging at the Rannells Drain crossing before construction of the B-Line in 2009, 
as long as it is done between August 2 and March 14 as agreed with the CDFG. Although Rannells Drain 
is shallow and stagnant, North Baja proposes to use sediment booms downstream of the trenching, which 
would contain sedimentation to the localized area. In accordance with the CM&R Plan, North Baja 
would attempt to complete actual in-stream trenching within 48 hours. Any sediment potentially released 
during construction would be removed the next time the PVID dredges the drain for agricultural purposes 
(expected to occur 1 year after construction) and would not be a permanent addition to the aquatic 
environment. Implementation of North Baja’s CM&R Plan and the use of sediment booms would reduce 
the potential for degradation of downstream water quality as a result of suspension of sediments, 
including contaminated sediments, and any impact on water quality would be temporary. 

With the exception of Rannells Drain, all other canals and drains along the B-Line are constrained 
within culverts under 18 th Avenue and would either be crossed by locating the pipeline over the culverts 
and/or by boring underneath them; therefore, construction would avoid disturbance to the beds and banks 
of these waterbodies. Erosion control devices would be installed in accordance with the CM&R Plan to 
protect these waterbodies from sedimentation resulting from adjacent construction activities. 
Construction across canals and drains in the Palo Verde Valley would be completed in accordance with 
the PVID permit conditions and site-specific agreements with private landowners. Similar construction 
techniques were used to construct the A-Line resulting in no impact on canals and drains. 

All canals and drains that would be crossed by the IID Lateral also flow through culverts. North 
Baja would cross these canals and drains using the same techniques and mitigation measures as proposed 
for the canals and drains that would be crossed by the B-Line. The IID Lateral would also cross the 
Alamo River (MP 32.3), which would be crossed by installing the pipeline in the road shoulder over the 
culverts that carry the water under Hunt Road. Use of this method would avoid impacts on the Alamo 
River. 


Impacts on the integrity of structures, such as bridges, pipelines, utilities, or culverts due to 
erosion or conveyance of stormwater during construction or operation would be less than significant 
through the implementation of the measures proposed in North Baja’s CM&R Plan. Additionally, no 
structures would be placed within waterbodies that could affect normal flow or increase the potential for 
flooding outside of the waterbody channel. 


4-55 


4.3.3.3 Major and Sensitive Waterbodies 

Waterbodies may be considered sensitive to pipeline construction for a number of reasons, 
including, but not limited to, the width of the crossing; the presence of coldwater aquatic habitat, 
fisheries, and imported or special status species; the presence of high-quality recreational, visual resource, 
or historic value; or the presence of impaired water or contaminated sediments. Waterbodies may also be 
considered sensitive if they are of special interest to a land management agency, resource agency, or 
Native American tribe. 

Two major waterbodies (greater than 100 feet wide) would be crossed by the B-Line: the 
Colorado River (MP 0.2, 790 feet wide) and the All-American Canal (MP 79.8, 200 feet wide). The 
Colorado River is the primary source for most of the irrigation water in the Project area and is regulated 
by the COE under section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 for navigable waters. The Colorado 
River is also considered sensitive because it provides potential habitat for the razorback sucker, a Federal 
and State-listed endangered fish species (see Section 4.7.4.4). The All-American Canal is under the 
jurisdiction of the BOR as part of a Federal irrigation system that diverts water from the Colorado River 
at the Imperial Dam near Yuma, Arizona, and takes it across the Colorado Desert to provide water 
through a series of smaller canals into the Imperial and Coachella Valleys. The canal is managed by the 
IID and is scheduled to have a lining installed between 2006 and 2007, before the proposed construction 
of the IID Lateral (BOR 1994, Remington 2005). 

The IID Lateral would cross two waterbodies greater than 100 feet wide: the All-American Canal 
(MPs 2.4 and 8.1, 200 feet wide) and the East Highline Canal (MP 27.5, 190 feet wide). The East 
Highline Canal delivers municipal water to the City of Holtville via an intake on Pear Canal (Mendez 
2005). This municipal water intake is located at gate 30L, approximately 6 miles downstream from the 
East Highline Canal crossing. 

North Baja proposes to cross the Colorado River, All-American Canal (three crossings), and the 
East Highline Canal using the HDD method. As discussed in Section 2.3, this technique involves drilling 
a pilot hole under the waterbody and banks, then enlarging that hole through successive reamings until the 
hole is large enough to accommodate the pipe. Throughout the process of drilling and enlarging the hole, 
a slurry made of naturally occurring non-toxic materials, such as bentonite clay and water, would be 
circulated through the drilling tools to lubricate the drill bit, remove drill cuttings, and hold the hole open. 
This slurry is referred to as drilling mud. Pipe sections long enough to span the entire crossing would be 
staged and welded along the construction work area on the opposite side of the waterbody and then pulled 
through the drilled hole. 

Unlike a conventional open-cut crossing, the HDD method would not alter or remove streambed 
or streambank habitat, cause in-stream sedimentation, or interfere with fish movement. The primary 
impact that could occur as a result of an HDD is an inadvertent release of drilling mud (frac-out) directly 
or indirectly into the waterbody. Drilling mud may leak through previously unidentified fractures in the 
material underlying the river or canal bed, in the area of the mud pits or tanks, or along the path of the 
drill due to unfavorable ground conditions. Although drilling mud consists of naturally occurring 
nontoxic materials, such as bentonite clay and water, in larger quantities the release of drilling mud into a 
waterbody could affect fisheries or other aquatic organisms by settling and temporarily inundating the 
habitats used by these species. This impact is less likely in fast-moving water, which can disperse the 
drilling mud over a large area. Moreover, the impact of a frac-out is substantially less than the impact 
associated with an open-cut crossing. 

The Colorado River and the All-American Canal were crossed by the A-Line in 2002 using the 
HDD method. One minor frac-out occurred on land near the HDD entry point at the Colorado River; no 


4-56 


frac-outs occurred in the water. Geotechnical investigations conducted at these crossing locations 
indicate that stiff cohesive soils are present that are conducive for the HDD crossing method. Preliminary 
geotechnical investigations conducted at the IID Lateral crossing locations of the All-American and East 
Highline Canals indicate that the HDD crossing method would be appropriate at these locations, although 
North Baja would conduct additional geotechnical investigations to confirm this preliminary assessment. 

North Baja has submitted site-specific HDD crossing plans for the Colorado River, All-American 
Canal, and East Highline Canal that show the drill entry and exit workspaces, the pipe fabrication and 
stringout areas, and the drill profiles. North Baja has also submitted an HDD Plan (see Appendix G) that 
describes the HDD process and how it would be monitored. The HDD Plan describes the agency 
notification procedures and the corrective action and cleanup procedures that would be followed in the 
event of a frac-out to land and the abandonment procedures that would be followed if it is necessary to 
abandon the drill hole. Although the HDD Plan addresses corrective action and cleanup procedures for a 
frac-out to land, it does not provide this information for a frac-out that occurs in the water. Therefore, the 
Agency Staffs recommend that: 

• North Baja shall prepare a revised HDD Plan that specifies the corrective action 
and cleanup procedures that would be followed in the event a frac-out occurs in the 
water during an HDD operation. North Baja shall file the revised plan with the 
FERC and the CSLC for the review and written approval of the Director of OEP 
and the Executive Officer of the CSLC before construction . 

With the implementation of the Agency Staffs’ recommendation, North Baja’s site-specific 
crossing plans and HDD Plan would reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels. 

4.3.3.4 Surface Water Uses During Construction 

Pipeline integrity would be verified through hydrostatic testing, which is conducted by pumping 
water into the pipe under pressure and checking for pressure loss resulting from leakage. The withdrawal 
of water from surface waterbodies to use for hydrostatic testing could reduce the amount of water 
available for downstream uses and could adversely affect aquatic habitats. The discharge of hydrostatic 
test water could increase erosion and downstream sedimentation and lead to the deterioration of receiving 
water quality. 

North Baja would hydrostatically test the B-Line, the BEI Lateral, and piping associated with the 
Ehrenberg Compressor Station and Blythe Meter Station with water obtained from an existing irrigation 
canal located adjacent to the Ehrenberg Compressor Station, an existing well on the compressor station 
site, or the All-American Canal. The water from the well and irrigation canal is hydrologically connected 
to the Colorado River. The fill volume would be limited to 1,500 gallons per minute or 10 percent of 
streamflow, whichever is less. Maintaining the prescribed withdrawal rate would avoid a reduction in 
streamflow quantity such that there would not be a flow change that would significantly damage either 
beneficial uses or aquatic life within the source waters. After testing is complete, the water would be 
discharged into lined irrigation canals or the All-American Canal. 

North Baja would hydrostatically test the IID Lateral with water obtained from the All-American 
Canal through an agreement with the IID to use approximately 7 acre-feet of water and discharge it 
directly back into the All-American Canal or into other IID irrigation facilities. The quantities of 
hydrostatic test water required for each facility and the water sources are listed in Table 4.3.3-2. 


4-57 




TABLE 4.3.3-2 

Hydrostatic Test Water Requirements for the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 

Facility 

Water Withdrawn 
(gallons) 

Source 

B-Line, BEI Lateral, Ehrenberg 

Compressor Station, Blythe Meter Station 

11,234,000 a 

Existing well at the Ehrenberg Compressor Station site, 
existing irrigation canal adjacent to the Ehrenberg 

Compressor Station Site, or the All-American Canal 

IID Lateral 

2,366,000 

All-American Canal 

The water would be withdrawn in phases coinciding with 
2.4). 

North Baja’s proposed construction schedule (see Section 


The water would be filtered before entering the pipe, and no chemicals would be added to the test 
water. Energy dissipation devices would be employed as necessary to minimize channel erosion. The use 
of such devices would prevent adverse effects on the operation of irrigation water control structures, 
gates, or valves. No municipal water supply reservoirs would be affected by the proposed Project. 

All hydrostatic test activities would be conducted in accordance with the measures in North 
Baja’s CM&R Plan (see Appendix E), applicable permits (including coordination with the BOR), and 
DOT pipeline safety regulations as set forth in Title 49 CFR Part 192. Implementation of these measures 
would reduce impacts on surface waters resulting from hydrostatic testing to less than significant levels. 
Sections 4.6.3 and 4.7 describe potential impacts of hydrostatic testing on aquatic resources and special 
status species, respectively. 

Water would also be needed to control fugitive dust generated during construction activities. The 
water would likely be obtained from the same sources that would provide water for hydrostatic testing 
activities (see Table 4.3.3-2). North Baja may also procure water from other local water purveyors. 
Because North Baja did not provide estimates of the quantities of water that would be required for dust 
control or specify the water sources or measures to protect aquatic resources during dust control water 
withdrawals, the Agency Staffs recommend that: 

• North Baja shall consult with the BLM and prepare a revised Dust Control Plan 
that specifies the sources of water that would be used for dust control, the 
anticipated quantities of water that would be required, and measures to prevent fish 
and fish egg entrainment during dust control water withdrawals. North Baja shall 
file the revised plan and documentation of BLM approval of the plan with the 
FERC and the CSLC for the review and written approval of the Director of OEP 
and the Executive Officer of the CSLC before construction . 

4.3.3.5 Streambed Alteration Agreement 

The Colorado River, the Alamo River, 70 irrigation drains and canals, and 265 dry desert washes 
would be crossed by the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project in California. The CDFG requires project 
Applicants to notify the CDFG of any activity that would divert, obstruct, or change the natural flow of 
the bed, channel, or bank (including associated riparian habitat) of a river, stream, or lake; or use material 
from a streambed prior to the Applicant’s commencement of the activity. Streams include, but are not 
limited to, intermittent and ephemeral streams, rivers, creeks, dry washes, sloughs, blue-line streams, and 
watercourses with subsurface flow. The irrigation drains and canals that would be crossed by the Project 
are not under the jurisdiction of the CDFG. The issuance of an SAA (section 1600 seq. of the California 
Fish and Game Code) for projects subject to the CEQA requires CEQA compliance actions by the CDFG 
as a responsible agency. For the CDFG to process an SAA, the EIS/EIR document must incorporate 


4-58 







information regarding impacts on lakes, streams, and associated habitat, including but not limited to the 
following items: 

• a delineation of lakes, streams, and associated habitat that would be directly or indirectly 
impacted by the proposed Project; 

• details on the biological resources (flora and fauna) associated with the lands and/or 
streams; 

• identification of the presence or absence of sensitive plants, animals, or natural 
communities; 

• a discussion of environmental alternatives; 

• a discussion of avoidance measures to reduce Project impacts; 

• a discussion of potential mitigation measures required to reduce Project impacts to less 
than significant levels; and 

• a discussion of potential adverse impacts from any increased runoff, sedimentation, soil 
erosion, and/or urban pollutants on streams and watercourses on or near the Project site, 
with mitigation measures proposed to alleviate such impacts. 

The CDFG, as a responsible agency under the CEQA, may consider the local jurisdiction’s (lead 
State agency) Negative Declaration or EIS/EIR for the Project. If the EIS/EIR does not fully identify 
potential impacts on lakes, streams, and associated resources, and provide adequate avoidance, mitigation, 
monitoring, and reporting commitments, additional CEQA documentation would be required before 
execution (signing) of the SAA. 

Existing Biological Resources 

Biological resources, including wetlands, vegetation, fish, wildlife, and special status species 
present in streambeds along the proposed pipeline routes are discussed in detail in Sections 4.4, 4.5, 4.6, 
and 4.7. These discussions include descriptions of habitat types crossed, aquatic and terrestrial species 
occurring or potentially occurring along the routes, and detailed reviews of protected species and their 
habitats. 

The Colorado River is the prominent surface water feature in the region. This waterbody is a 
warmwater fishery that provides habitat for several special status species. The riparian vegetation 
adjacent to the river also provides habitat for a variety of wildlife. Additionally, the Colorado River is an 
important contributor to the region’s biodiversity. 

Two vegetative types are generally found along the desert washes crossed by the Project: 
Sonoran creosote bush scrub and desert wash woodland. Desert wash woodland is the dominant 
community along well-defined washes. Although not the most common vegetation type crossed by the 
pipeline routes, desert wash woodland provides greater structural diversity than the Sonoran creosote bush 
scrub due to its taller vegetation and higher density of vegetation. These characteristics increase wildlife 
value of the desert wash woodland habitat type. 


4-59 


Biological Studies Conducted 

In accordance with the requirements of the SAA, a field-based habitat assessment of the proposed 
B-Line route was conducted before construction of the A-Line in 2000, and similar habitat assessments of 
the BEI Lateral and the IID Lateral were conducted in October 2005 to determine the potential for the 
occurrence of protected species or their habitats and to ascertain information on vegetative communities 
within the Project area. Species-specific surveys were conducted for protected species identified by 
agencies as potentially occurring along the route throughout 2005 and in the Spring of 2006. North 
Baja’s survey methods were designed in consultation with appropriate Federal and State agencies. 
Additional discussion of surveys for protected species is included in Section 4.7. 

Impact Analysis 

The evaluation of potential impacts of the Project on streambeds focuses on biological resources 
associated with the feature, including wetlands, vegetation, fish, wildlife, and special status species. In 
general, impacts on biological resources within the Project area would be minor and temporary. Direct 
impacts would be limited to increased erosion and potential sedimentation of the dry washes during initial 
storm events following construction. Clearing of riparian vegetation would remove some available 
habitat and would temporarily displace wildlife species to available adjacent habitats. Some individuals 
of less mobile species may be killed or injured by construction activities. 

No impact on the Colorado River and associated riparian corridor is expected because the river 
and associated riparian vegetation would be crossed using the HDD method (see Sections 2.3.2 and 
4.3.3.3) and the drill entry and exit points would be outside of the riparian zone. 

Detailed discussions of potential impact on biological resources resulting from the North Baja 
Pipeline Expansion Project are included throughout Section 4. Impacts on waterbodies that would be 
crossed by the Project are discussed in Section 4.3.3, impacts on vegetation are discussed in Section 4.5, 
impacts on wildlife and aquatic resources are discussed in Section 4.6, and impacts on special status 
species are discussed in Section 4.7. 

Impact Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures 

Specific mitigation measures to minimize impact on biological resources are discussed in the 
respective subsections of Section 4. Additionally, North Baja has developed its CM&R Plan (see 
Appendix E) to minimize impacts on the Project area during construction. The CM&R Plan includes a 
discussion of proposed restoration activities and other mitigation measures. 

4.3.4 Arrowhead Alternative 

According to the EPA Source Water Protection Region IX map, the nearest sole-source aquifer to 
the Arrowhead Alternative is the Ocotillo-Coyote Aquifer, near the Imperial-San Diego County line. 

No wells have been identified within 150 feet of the construction work area for the Arrowhead 
Alternative. If any water wells are identified within 150 feet of the construction work area before or 
during construction, North Baja would implement its CM&R and SPCC Plans, and would monitor these 
wells. These measures would minimize the potential for the Project to impact groundwater. 

The Arrowhead Extension would cross the PVID’s C-05 Canal and two unnamed canals. The 
unnamed canals are private ditches that are not part of the PVID irrigation system. North Baja would 
cross the unnamed canals using the open-cut method and would restore the canals to their previous 


4-60 


condition after construction. North Baja would prevent impacts on the C-05 Canal by use of the bore 
crossing method. There are no surface waters at the aboveground facility sites. 

North Baja would obtain hydrostatic test water for the Arrowhead Extension from the PVID, 
local wells, or a commercial source. Approximately 586,256 gallons of water would be needed. Test 
water would contact only new pipe and no chemicals would be added. The hydrostatic test would be 
conducted as outlined in Section 4.3.3.4. After testing, the water would be discharged into the C-05 
Canal. North Baja would obtain a NPDES permit for the hydrostatic test water discharge and would 
comply with the terms and conditions of that permit. 

Water to control fugitive dust generated during construction activities would likely be obtained 
from the same sources that would provide water for hydrostatic testing activities. 

4.3.5 No Project Alternative 

Under the No Project Alternative, the FERC would deny North Baja’s application for a 
Certificate and a Presidential Permit amendment, the CSLC would deny North Baja’s application for an 
amendment to its right-of-way lease across California’s Sovereign and School Lands, and the BLM would 
deny North Baja’s application to amend its existing Right-of-Way Grant and obtain a Temporary Use 
Permit for the portion of the Project on Federal lands. The No Project Alternative means that the Project 
would not go forward and the Project-related facilities would not be installed. Accordingly, none of the 
potential environmental impacts identified for the construction and operation of the proposed Project 
would occur. 

Because the proposed Project is privately funded, it is unknown whether North Baja would fund 
another energy project in California. However, should the No Project Alternative be selected, the energy 
needs identified in Section 1.1 would likely be addressed through other means, such as through other 
LNG or natural gas-related pipeline projects. Such projects may result in potential environmental impacts 
of the nature and magnitude of the proposed Project as well as impacts particular to their respective 
configurations and operations; however, these impacts cannot be predicted with any certainty at this time. 


4-61 


4.4 


WETLANDS 


4.4.1 Significance Criteria 

An adverse impact on wetlands would be considered significant and would require mitigation if 
Project construction or operation would: 

• fill or alter a wetland resulting in an adverse change in its hydrology or soils, or the 
composition of vegetation of a unique, rare, or special concern wetland community; or 

• cause short- or long-term violations of Federal, tribal, or State water quality standards for 
streams that lead to wetlands, measured as in-stream elevated turbidity readings or 
decreased dissolved oxygen levels. 

4.4.2 Existing Wetland Resources 

Wetlands are areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and 
duration sufficient to support a prevalence of wetland vegetation adapted for life in saturated soil 
conditions (COE 1987). Wetlands can be a source of substantial biodiversity and serve a variety of 
functions that include providing wildlife habitat, recreational opportunities, flood control, and naturally 
improving water quality. 

Wetlands in the Project area are regulated at the Federal and State levels. On the Federal level, 
the COE has authority under section 404 of the CWA to review and issue permits for activities that would 
result in the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States, including wetlands. 
Section 401 of the CWA requires that proposed dredge and fill activities under section 404 be reviewed 
and certified by the designated State agency, in this case the CRWQCB, so that the proposed Project 
would meet State water quality standards. 

For the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project, wetlands were delineated using the methodology 
described in the COE Wetlands Delineation Manual (COE Manual), Technical Report Y-87-1. The 
delineations were conducted during July through October 2000 for the wetlands that would be crossed by 
the B-Line and during September 2005 for the wetlands that would be crossed by the IID Lateral. On 
September 23, 2005, North Baja met with representatives from the COE who approved of North Baja’s 
wetland delineation methods after reviewing selected wetlands along the B-Line and IID Lateral. A total 
of 18 COE jurisdictional wetlands (2.7 miles) would be crossed by the proposed Project. No isolated, 
non-COE jurisdictional wetlands would be crossed by the Project. The location, wetland identifier, FWS 
National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) classification, crossing length, and approximate acreage that would 
be affected by construction and operation of each wetland are listed in Table 4.4.2-1. 

Pipeline Facilities 

Based on North Baja’s field surveys, the proposed pipeline facilities would cross 18 wetlands for 
a total distance of approximately 2.7 miles. The B-Line would cross 13 of these wetlands for a total 
crossing length of 13,995 feet (2.7 miles). Ten of these would be palustrine scrub-shrub wetlands and 
three would be palustrine emergent wetlands. Two of the scrub-shrub wetlands are adjacent to the 
Colorado River between MPs 0.1 and 0.2. Vegetation in these wetlands includes arrow weed, tamarisk, 
and willow, as well as a few other species. Eight other scrub-shrub wetlands are between MPs 28.2 and 
31.3. All of these wetlands are sodic seasonal wetlands with visible efflorescence (salt) covering the 
surface. The vegetation in these wetlands is dominated by tamarisk, iodine bush, and greasewood. 


4-62 


TABLE 4.4.2-1 


Wetlands Crossed by the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 

Approximate 

Milepost 

County, State 

Wetland 

Identifier 

National Wetlands 
Inventory (NWI) 
Classification a 

Crossing 
Length (feet) 

Temporary 
Construction 
Impact (acres) b 

Permanent Impact 
(acres) 0 

B-Line 







0.1 

La Paz, AZ 

P26-WE-1 

PSS/PEM 

250 d 

0.0 

0.0 

0.2 

La Paz, AZ 

P24-WE-1 

PSS 

50 d 

0.0 

0.0 

2.7 

Riverside, CA 

N55-WE-3 

PEM 

70 

0.2 

0.0 

28.2 

Imperial, CA 

N68-WE-29 

PSS 

360 

1.0 

0.1 

28.3 

Imperial, CA 

N69-WE-29 

PSS 

970 

2.5 

0.2 

28.5 

Imperial, CA 

N70-WE-29 

PSS 

515 

1.7 

0.1 

28.8 

Imperial, CA 

CWE-1 

PSS 

194 

0.5 

<0.1 

29.1 

Imperial, CA 

CWE-2 

PSS 

151 

0.4 

<0.1 

29.1 

Imperial, CA 

CWE-3 

PSS 

287 

0.7 

0.1 

29.7 

Imperial, CA 

CWE-4 

PSS 

9,630 

23.2 

2.2 

31.3 

Imperial, CA 

CWE-5 

PSS 

1,483 

5.4 

0.3 

79.8 

Imperial, CA 

D18-WE-81C 

PEM 

15 d 

0.0 

0.0 

79.8 

Imperial, CA 

P1-WE-80 

PEM 

20 d 

0.0 

0.0 

Subtotal B-Line 




13,995 

35.6 

3.0 

BEI Lateral 



- None - 




Subtotal BEI Lateral 



0.0 

0.0 

0.0 

IID Lateral 







27.5 

Imperial, CA 

East Highline 
Canal - East 

PSS 

50 d 

0.1 

0.0 

27.6 

Imperial, CA 

East Highline 
Canal - West 

PSS 

50 d 

0.0 

0.0 

32.3 

Imperial, CA 

Alamo River 

PSS 

340 e 

0.0 

0.0 

43.4 

Imperial, CA 

Acacia Lateral 
Canal 

PSS 

40' 

0.0 

0.0 

44.1 

Imperial, CA 

Alder Lateral 
Canal 

PSS 

18 f 

0.0 

0.0 

Subtotal IID Lateral 



498 

0.0 

0.0 

Project Total 




14,493 

35.7 

3.0 


NWI Wetland Classification (Cowardin et al. 1979): 

PSS = Palustrine scrub-shrub 
PEM = Palustrine emergent 

Acres include the construction right-of-way and extra workspaces. 

Permanent wetland vegetation type conversion impacts are associated with scrub-shrub wetlands. Operational 
requirements (corrosion/leak surveys) allow a 10-foot-wide corridor centered over the pipeline to be maintained in an 
herbaceous state; however, North Baja does not plan to conduct regular vegetation maintenance. 

Would be crossed by horizontal directional drill. 

Would not be affected because the pipeline would be installed in the road shoulder outside the wetland boundary. 
Would be crossed by the bore method. 


4-63 





Of the three palustrine emergent wetlands that would be crossed by the B-Line, one wetland is in 
a topographic depression between an irrigation canal levee road and an adjacent agricultural field at MP 
2.7. Dominant species in this wetland include nut sedge, Bermuda grass, and barnyard grass. The other 
two emergent wetlands are on the north and south banks of the All-American Canal at MP 79.8. 

The drains that would be crossed in the Palo Verde Valley contain vegetation typical of the 
wetland communities in the area. However, these drains are not considered jurisdictional by the COE and 
are occasionally dredged. 

No wetlands would be crossed by the BEI Lateral. 

The IID Lateral would cross five palustrine scrub-shrub wetlands for a total crossing length of 
498 feet (less than 0.1 mile). Of these, two wetlands are adjacent to the East Highline Canal between 
MPs 27.5 and 27.6. Vegetation in these wetlands includes arrow weed, tamarisk, and salt bush. A scrub- 
shrub wetland dominated by tamarisk is adjacent to the Alamo River at MP 32.3. At the Acacia Lateral 
Canal crossing at MP 43.4, a tamarisk-dominated scrub-shrub wetland would be crossed. A scrub-shrub 
wetland associated with the Alder Lateral Canal that is dominated by tamarisk, salt bush, and arrow weed 
would be crossed at MP 44.1. 

Aboveground Facilities 

No wetlands are present at any of the aboveground facility sites. 

Pipe Storage and Contractor Yards 

No wetlands are at the four proposed pipe storage and contractor yards. 

Access Roads 

No wetlands are along the proposed access roads. 

4.4.3 General Impact and Mitigation 

Although wetlands occur along both the B-Line and the IID Lateral, construction impacts would 
primarily occur on wetlands along the B-Line. Construction of the B-Line would affect a total of 35.6 
acres of wetlands, including 0.2 acre of emergent wetland and 35.4 acres of scrub-shrub wetlands (see 
Table 4.4.2-1). Of the total 35.6 acres of disturbance along the B-Line, about 26.9 acres were previously 
disturbed during construction of the A-Line. About 8.7 acres of new wetland disturbance would result 
from construction of the B-Line. Four wetlands, two associated with the Colorado River crossing and two 
associated with the All-American Canal crossing, would be avoided by the use of the HDD crossing 
method at these river and canal crossings (see Table 4.4.2-1). 

Wetland impacts along the IID Lateral would be avoided by use of the HDD crossing method at 
the East Highline Canal, constructing in the road shoulder outside of the wetland boundary at the Alamo 
River, or by use of the bore crossing method at the Acacia Lateral and Alder Lateral Canals. However, 
about 0.1 acre of scrub-shrub wetlands would be affected by North Baja’s request to locate extra 
workspace within the wetland that would be crossed on the east side of the Highline Canal at MP 27.5. 

The primary impact of pipeline construction and right-of-way maintenance activities on wetlands 
would be the temporary and permanent alteration of wetland vegetation. These effects would be greatest 
during and immediately following construction. Generally, the wetland vegetation community would 


4-64 


eventually transition back into a community with functionality similar to that of the wetland before 
construction. In emergent wetlands, the herbaceous vegetation would regenerate quickly (typically within 
1 to 3 years). Scrub-shrub wetlands could take several years to reach functionality similar to 
preconstruction conditions depending on the age and complexity of the system. However, given the fast 
growing species (primarily tamarisk) that dominate the scrub-shrub wetlands that would be affected and 
the results of North Baja’s re vegetation monitoring for the A-Line, regeneration is expected to occur 
within a shorter time frame. 

Following revegetation, there would be little permanent impact on emergent wetland vegetation 
in the maintained right-of-way because these areas naturally consist of and would remain as open and 
herbaceous communities. Herbaceous wetland vegetation in the pipeline right-of-way is not generally 
mowed or otherwise maintained, although the FERC’s Procedures allows annual maintenance of a 10- 
foot-wide strip centered over the pipeline. A 10-foot-wide corridor centered over the pipeline could 
potentially be maintained in an herbaceous condition to facilitate corrosion/leak surveys. Permanent 
impacts would occur on scrub-shrub wetlands if annual maintenance were conducted within this 10-foot¬ 
wide strip preventing the scrub-shrub species in this area from reaching mature size. Approximately 3.0 
acres of scrub-shrub wetlands along the B-Line could be permanently affected by vegetation type 
conversions that would be primarily impacts on the structure of the wetlands (i.e., result in more 
herbaceous vegetation and fewer shrubs), but would not greatly reduce the existing wetland functions or 
amount of wetlands in the Project area. However, North Baja does not routinely conduct vegetation 
maintenance along its right-of-way; therefore, permanent impacts on wetlands would not be expected to 
occur. 


Of the 13 wetlands along the B-Line route, 9 were affected during construction of the A-Line, and 
4 were previously avoided by HDD crossings. North Baja conducted post-construction monitoring of the 
nine previously affected wetlands and reports that the wetlands have rapidly revegetated to their 
preconstruction condition with both native (salt bush) and non-native (tamarisk) species. Because of the 
high concentration of salts within these wetlands, few native species are able to colonize these areas, and 
the presence of tamarisk propagules in the wetland topsoil and in adjacent areas favors recolonization and 
dominance by this non-native species. 

Other types of impacts associated with construction of the pipeline could include temporary 
changes in wetland hydrology and water quality. During construction, failure to segregate topsoil over 
the trenchline in non-saturated wetlands could result in the mixing of the topsoil with the subsoil. This 
disturbance could result in altered biological activities and chemical conditions in wetland soils and could 
affect the re-establishment and natural recruitment of native wetland vegetation after restoration. In 
addition, inadvertent compaction and rutting of soils during construction could result from the movement 
of heavy machinery and the transport of pipe sections. The resulting alteration of the natural hydrologic 
patterns of the wetlands could inhibit seed germination or increase the potential for siltation. The 
discharge of stormwater, trench water, or hydrostatic test water could result in silt-laden water entering a 
wetland and cause the release of chemical and nutrient pollutants from sediments. Construction clearing 
activities and disturbance of wetland vegetation could also temporarily affect the wetland’s capacity to 
buffer flood flows and/or control erosion. The procedures that North Baja would implement to avoid or 
minimize these impacts are discussed below. 

Wetland Construction and Mitigation Procedures 

In general, wetland impacts would be minimized by avoidance, mitigation of impacts, and 
compensation in accordance with Federal, State, and local regulations. 


4-65 


North Baja would avoid impacts on wetlands by implementing the HDD crossing method at six 
wetland crossings, and implementing the bore crossing method at two wetland crossings. North Baja 
would further avoid impacts on wetlands by locating the IID Lateral within existing road shoulders. 
Additionally, North Baja would avoid and minimize impacts on wetlands by its proposal to install the B- 
Line 25 feet south and west of North Baja’s existing A-Line and work over the existing pipeline. 

North Baja would mitigate construction-related impacts by implementing its CM&R Plan as 
discussed below and by complying with the COE's section 404 and the CRWQCB’s section 401 permit 
conditions. In order for the COE to determine whether practicable alternatives have been taken, North 
Baja is required to avoid wetland impacts to the maximum extent possible. North Baja must also 
demonstrate that it has taken appropriate and practicable steps to minimize wetland impacts in compliance 
with the COE's section 404(b)(1) guidelines that restrict discharges of dredged or fill material where a 
less environmentally damaging alternative exists. When unavoidable wetland impacts are proposed, the 
COE and the CRWQCB would require that all practicable actions be taken to mitigate those impacts. 
This is consistent with the CEQ’s Regulations for Implementing the Procedural Provisions of the 
National Environmental Policy Act (Title 40 CFR Part 1508.20), which defines mitigation to include the 
following criteria: 

• avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action; 

• minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its 

implementation; 

• rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment; 

• reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations 

during the life of the action; and 

• compensating for the impact by replacing or providing substitute resources or 

environments. 

North Baja would implement the wetland construction and restoration measures contained in its 
CM&R Plan (see Appendix E). The CM&R Plan incorporates many of the measures of the FERC’s 
Procedures that are relevant to protect wetlands within the Project area. Some of the measures pertaining 
to wetland crossings specified in the FERC’s Procedures and/or to which North Baja has committed, 
include: 

• prohibiting storage of hazardous materials, chemicals, fuels, and lubricating oils within a 
wetland or within 100 feet of a wetland boundary; 

• requiring that native vegetation on the right-of-way within wetlands be cut at ground 
level, leaving existing root systems in place to promote regrowth; 

• requiring segregation of the uppermost 1 foot of wetland topsoil from the underlying 
subsoil in areas disturbed by trenching; 

• limiting the operation of construction equipment within wetlands to that equipment 
essential for clearing, excavation, pipe installation, backfilling, and restoration activities; 


4-66 


• requiring all nonessential equipment to traverse around wetlands using upland access 
roads where wetland soils are prone to rutting and/or cannot be appropriately stabilized; 
and 

• minimizing duration of construction-related disturbance within wetlands. 

One measure of the FERC’s Procedures that North Baja did not incorporate into its CM&R Plan 
is the provision to limit the width of the construction right-of-way in wetlands to 75 feet or less. North 
Baja did not incorporate this requirement because, of the 18 wetlands that would be affected by the 
Project, 6 would be avoided by HDD crossings, 2 would be avoided by bore crossings, and 1 would be 
avoided by constructing within the road shoulder adjacent to the Alamo River. The one emergent wetland 
that would be affected would be crossed within the 60-foot-wide construction right-of-way along 18 th 
Avenue. The remaining eight wetlands that would be crossed are scrub-shrub wetlands that contain a 
high percentage of tamarisk, which is considered a noxious weed species. 

Additionally, North Baja is requesting a variance from Section VI.B.l of the FERC’s Procedures, 
which requires that all extra workspaces (such as staging areas and additional spoil storage areas) be 
located at least 50 feet away from wetland boundaries, except where the adjacent upland consists of 
actively cultivated or rotated cropland or other disturbed land. North Baja proposes to locate extra 
workspaces within five wetlands, four along the B-Line and one along the IID Lateral. Use of these extra 
workspaces would affect 2.7 acres of tamarisk-dominated scrub-shrub wetlands (2.6 acres along the B- 
Line and 0.1 acre along the IID Lateral). Of the total 2.7 acres that would be affected, 1.8 acres were 
previously disturbed during construction of the A-Line. Table A-2 in the CM&R Plan (see Appendix E) 
lists the specific wetlands and workspace requirements. 

The Agency Staffs agree that it would not be necessary for North Baja to reduce the width of its 
construction right-of-way to 75 feet in wetlands that are predominantly tamarisk. The Agency Staffs 
approve North Baja’s request to locate extra workspaces in the wetlands specified in Table A-2 of its 
CM&R Plan, and also agree that the other measures of the FERC’s Procedures that are omitted from the 
CM&R Plan (e.g., do not cut trees outside of the approved construction work area to obtain timber for 
riprap or equipment mats; use no more than two layers of timber riprap to support equipment on the 
construction right-of-way) are not necessary in the arid climate that would be crossed or are not directly 
applicable to the Project. 

North Baja indicated that it has initiated consultation with the CRWQCB. In its review of the 
Project to determine whether to issue a section 401 permit, the CRWQCB may impose permit conditions 
requiring mitigation measures in addition to those described above. In accordance with the CM&R Plan, 
North Baja would prepare and submit an updated CM&R Plan to the Agency Staffs before construction if 
necessary to incorporate any additional requirements of Federal, State, and local permits. North Baja’s 
adherence to its CM&R Plan and compliance with the COE’s section 404 and the CRWQCB’s section 
401 permit conditions would adequately protect wetland resources crossed by the pipeline route and 
reduce impacts to less than significant levels. 

4.4.4 Site-specific Impact and Mitigation 

The two wetlands associated with the Colorado River, two wetlands associated with the All- 
American Canal, and two wetlands associated with the East Highline Canal would be avoided by the 
HDDs of these waterbodies. Two wetlands associated with the Acacia Lateral and Alder Lateral Canals 
would be avoided by North Baja’s proposal to bore beneath these features. In addition, the wetland 
associated with the Alamo River would be avoided by constructing the pipeline within the road shoulder 
outside of the wetland boundaries. 


4-67 


North Baja’s clearing of a 105-foot-wide construction right-of-way through the eight scrub-shrub 
wetlands located between MPs 28.2 and 31.3 would reduce the amount of tamarisk occurring along the 
pipeline route. The CM&R Plan contains a measure to remove all tamarisk trees and shrubs including 
stumps and root systems. North Baja has the right to maintain a 10-foot-wide strip centered over the 
pipeline if necessary for periodic corrosion/leak surveys. A 10-foot-wide maintained corridor would 
result in the permanent conversion of about 3.0 acres of scrub-shrub wetland to emergent wetland. 
However, as previously discussed, North Baja has not conducted vegetation maintenance along the A- 
Line and does not propose to conduct annual vegetation maintenance in the areas associated with the 
North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project. As documented in North Baja’s post-construction monitoring 
reports, wetlands affected by construction of the A-Line have largely revegetated to a state similar to 
preconstruction conditions. Therefore, no long-term or significant adverse impact on wetlands is 
expected to result from the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project. 

The emergent wetland at MP 2.7 would be within the 60-foot-wide construction right-of-way 
along 18 th Avenue. Impacts on this wetland would be temporary and minor, and the wetland would be 
expected to revegetate quickly. 

The Project would not result in the placement of fill within wetlands, and wetland topsoil and 
hydrology would be restored at the affected wetlands. No streams run through the affected wetlands, 
therefore, construction through wetlands would not result in significant water quality impacts on streams. 

4.4.5 Arrowhead Alternative 

The Arrowhead Alternative would not affect wetland resources. 

4.4.6 No Project Alternative 

Under the No Project Alternative, the FERC would deny North Baja’s application for a 
Certificate and a Presidential Permit amendment, the CSLC would deny North Baja’s application for an 
amendment to its right-of-way lease across California’s Sovereign and School Lands, and the BLM would 
deny North Baja’s application to amend its existing Right-of-Way Grant and obtain a Temporary Use 
Permit for the portion of the Project on Federal lands. The No Project Alternative means that the Project 
would not go forward and the Project-related facilities would not be installed. Accordingly, none of the 
potential environmental impacts identified for the construction and operation of the proposed Project 
would occur. 

Because the proposed Project is privately funded, it is unknown whether North Baja would fund 
another energy project in California. However, should the No Project Alternative be selected, the energy 
needs identified in Section 1.1 would likely be addressed through other means, such as through other 
LNG or natural gas-related pipeline projects. Such projects may result in potential environmental impacts 
of the nature and magnitude of the proposed Project as well as impacts particular to their respective 
configurations and operations; however, these impacts cannot be predicted with any certainty at this time. 


4-68 


4.5 VEGETATION 


4.5.1 Significance Criteria 

An adverse impact on vegetation would be considered significant and would require mitigation if 
Project construction or operation would: 

• disturb a substantial portion of the vegetation type within a local region to the point 
where natural or enhanced regeneration could not restore the vegetation to its 
preconstruction condition within 3 years; 

• result in the long-term (more than 5 years) reduction or alteration of unique, rare, or 
special concern vegetation types; riparian vegetation; or natural communities; 

• introduce new, or lead to the expanded range of existing, invasive noxious weed species 
or soil pests, so that they interfere with crop production or successful revegetation of 
natural communities; or 

• cause a spill or leak that would contaminate the soil to the extent of eradicating the 
existing vegetation, inhibiting revegetation, or migrating to other areas and affecting soil 
and water ecology via erosion and sedimentation. 

4.5.2 Existing Vegetation Resources 

The proposed pipeline route is entirely within the Lower Colorado River Valley subdivision of 
the Sonoran Desert, and vegetation communities found in the Project vicinity are typical of that 
subdivision. The characterization of vegetation communities presented in this EIS/EIR is based on the 
published and unpublished literature (Holland 1986, Sawyer and Keeler-Wolf 1995) as well as 
information from field surveys. 

Distinct vegetation communities have been identified that occur within the Project area as 
discussed below. Table 4.5.2-1 lists these communities; provides general descriptions, including common 
vegetative species typical of each community; and identifies the facility and milepost ranges where each 
community occurs. Wetland vegetation communities that would be affected by the Project are discussed 
in Section 4.4. Areas of riparian vegetation would be avoided by the Project. 

Pipeline Facilities 

The B-Line would cross three native desert vegetation communities as well as agricultural and 
urban/ruderal lands that have been significantly altered by human settlement. 

The primary vegetation community that would be crossed by the B-Line is creosote scrub. This 
community comprises about 78 percent of the vegetation communities crossed by the B-Line. The next 
two most prevalent vegetation communities crossed are urban/ruderal and desert wash woodland, 
comprising about 12 and 10 percent, respectively, of the vegetation communities crossed by the B-Line. 
The remaining upland vegetation community that would be crossed by the B-Line is the agricultural 
community, which would account for less than 1 percent of the vegetation crossed. 


4-69 


TABLE 4.5.2-1 

Vegetation Communities Affected by the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 

Vegetation Community 

General Description 

Common Species 

Location of Occurrence 
(Facility/Milepost Range) 

Creosote bush scrub 

Generally less than 10 feet tall and 
widely spaced, usually with bare ground 
between plants. Perennial vegetation is 
less than 25 percent of the landscape. 

Also included are non-wetland tamarisk 
scrub, rocky slopes, stabilized sand 
dunes, and desert saltbush scrub 
communities. 

White bursage, brittlebush, 
ocotillo, saltbushes, desert- 
holly, mesquites, tamarisk 

B-Line, MPs 11.7-28.2, 
28.6-29.7, 31.7-79.8 

IID Lateral, MPs 0.0-3.5, 
7.7-27.5 

Desert wash woodland 

Open to dense, drought deciduous, 
microphyllous riparian thorn scrub 
woodlands, less than 60 feet tall. 

Cat-claw acacia, desert 
broom, fairy duster, 
burrobrush, Anderson’s 
thornbush, tamarisk 

B-Line, MPs 11.7-28.2, 
28.6-29.7, 31.7-79.8 

Desert sand dune 

Sparsely vegetated, actively moving, 
sand dunes. 

Creosote bush, mesquite, 
dune buckwheat, dune 
sunflower, Peirson’s 
milkvetch 

IID Lateral, MPs 0.0-7.7 

Agricultural 

Consists of commercial agricultural crops 
dependent on irrigation. 

Cotton, alfalfa, wheat, melons 

B-Line, MPs 0.4-2.9, 
10.5-11.7 

IID Lateral, MPs 27.6- 
42.8, 44.1-45.6 

Urban/ruderal 

Sparsely vegetated, previously disturbed 
areas. May include improved 
landscaped areas. 

Wild oats, mustard, thistle, 
landscape species 

B-Line, MPs 0.0-0.2, 
2.9-10.5 

BEI Lateral MPs 0.0-0.6 

IID Lateral, MPs 42.8- 
44.1,45.6-45.7 


The BEI Lateral would cross the urban/ruderal and creosote bush scrub communities, which 
account for 67 and 33 percent, respectively, of the vegetation communities crossed. 

The primary vegetation community that would be crossed by the IID Lateral is urban/ruderal, 
which accounts for about 74 percent of the vegetation communities crossed. The next most prevalent 
vegetation community that would be crossed is creosote bush scrub, which accounts for 16 percent of the 
vegetation communities crossed. The desert sand dune and agricultural communities account for 9 
percent and less than 1 percent, respectively, of the vegetation communities crossed by the IID Lateral. 

Aboveground Facilities 

The modifications proposed at the Ehrenberg Compressor Station would take place primarily 
within the fenceline; however, the installation of about 400 feet of header piping outside the fenced site 
would affect the urban/ruderal community. The creosote bush scrub community would be affected by 
construction of the Blythe Meter Station and modifications at the Ogilby Meter Station (including an 
odorant facility and a pig launcher and receiver). Construction of the El Centro Meter Station would 
affect the urban/ruderal community. 

Nine valves would be constructed along the B-Line, all of which would be collocated with 
existing aboveground facilities. Four of the B-Line valves (#s 2, 5, 6, and 7) would be collocated with 
existing valves along the A-Line; however, the permanently maintained area at the existing valve sites 
would need to be expanded in order to accommodate these new valves. Expansion of these existing sites 
would affect the following vegetation communities: urban/ruderal (valve #2) and creosote bush scrub 
(valve #s 5, 6, and 7). Construction of the remaining five valves (#s 1, 3, 4, 8, and 9) would take place 


4-70 





within currently maintained aboveground facility sites and would not affect additional vegetation 
resources. 

Four valves would be constructed in association with the IID Lateral. Valve #1 would be within 
the Ogilby Meter Station site and would not require any additional land. Valve #2 would affect the desert 
sand dune community, valve #3 would affect the creosote bush scrub community, and valve #4 would 
affect the agricultural community. 

The creosote bush scrub community would be affected by construction of the pig launcher and 
receiver at the Rannells Trap, as well as the construction of the tap at the B-Line and the pig launcher 
associated with the IID Lateral. 

Pipe Storage and Contractor Yards 

North Baja identified four pipe storage and contractor yards to be used during construction, three 
of which were used during construction of the A-Line. All four of these sites are previously disturbed 
sites used for industrial/commercial purposes and occur primarily within the urban/ruderal community 
although the creosote bush scrub community would also be affected. 

Access Roads 

Improvements or modifications to 44 existing access roads and construction of 1 new permanent 
access road (less than 0.1 mile long) associated with the B-Line would affect the creosote bush scrub, 
agricultural, and desert wash woodland communities. The construction of one permanent access road 
(less than 0.1 mile long) associated with the BEI Lateral would affect the creosote bush scrub community. 
Construction of the IID Lateral would require improvements or modifications to six existing access roads 
and the construction of one new permanent access road (less than 0.1 mile long) that would affect the 
creosote bush scrub, urban/ruderal, agricultural, and desert sand dune communities. 

4.5.3 General Impact and Mitigation 

Pipeline Facilities 

The primary impact of the pipeline facilities on vegetation would be the cutting, clearing, and/or 
removal of existing vegetation within the construction work area. The degree of impact would depend on 
the type and amount of vegetation affected, the rate at which the vegetation would regenerate after 
construction, and the frequency of vegetation maintenance conducted during operation. Existing 
vegetation would be disturbed everywhere along the construction right-of-way. In general, the swath of 
vegetation that would be disturbed during construction would be 105 feet wide for the length of the B- 
Line, 60 feet wide for the BEI Lateral, and between 60 and 80 feet wide for the IID Lateral. Because 
North Baja would work over its existing pipeline to construct the B-Line, it would minimize the area of 
new disturbance and, therefore, would minimize impacts on vegetation. About 75 percent of the 
vegetation disturbance associated with the B-Line would be within North Baja’s existing, previously 
disturbed right-of-way. 

Secondary effects associated with disturbances to vegetation could include increased soil erosion 
(see Section 4.2), increased potential for the introduction and establishment of invasive weedy species 
(see Section 4.5.5), and a local reduction in available wildlife habitat (see Section 4.6.1). Other potential 
effects on vegetation could include the contamination of soils from spills or leaks of fuels, lubricants, and 
coolants from construction equipment that would restrict the ability of vegetation to become re¬ 
established. 


4-71 


North Baja’s proposed construction right-of-way and temporary extra workspaces would disturb a 
total of about 1,515.8 acres of vegetation. Table 4.5.3-1 lists the amount of each vegetation community 
that would be affected by construction and operation of the pipeline facilities. 

The most common vegetation communities that would be affected are creosote bush scrub (943.7 
acres) and urban/ruderal (369.7 acres), which account for about 87 percent of the vegetation that would be 
cleared or affected by construction. The next most common communities that would be disturbed are 
desert wash woodland (82.9 acres) and agriculture (78.4 acres) accounting for about 11 percent of the 
affected vegetation. The least common vegetation community that would be affected is desert sand dunes 
(41.1 acres), which accounts for less than 3 percent of the vegetation that would be disturbed by the 
construction of the pipeline facilities. 

After cleanup and reseeding of the right-of-way, the agricultural community would typically 
regenerate quickly and impacts on these vegetation communities would be short term. Cultivated areas 
are regularly disturbed, generally receive ample water through irrigation if necessary, and would quickly 
re-establish on the right-of-way following replanting by the landowners. 

The removal of desert vegetation would have a long-term impact. The arid environment 
characteristic of these habitats is not conducive to plant growth and would slow the regeneration of 
vegetation following construction. Moreover, because of the dryness of these areas, regeneration by 
active seeding or planting is typically ineffective. Natural regeneration of these areas would take several 
years and in some cases could take over 50 years. 

Of the vegetation communities that would be disturbed, the most sensitive is the desert wash 
woodland, which would be crossed by the B-Line. Desert wash species growing in microphyll woodland, 
such as ironwood, blue palo verde, and smoke tree, provide structural diversity, cover, and forage for 
many more wildlife species than the creosote bush scrub habitat. Although this vegetation type provides 
important habitat, it has not been officially designated as a vegetation community of special concern or 
value. 


Of the total 82.9 acres of desert wash woodland that would be cleared, 22.0 acres (about 26 
percent) would be new disturbance (i.e., not disturbed during construction of the A-Line). Because of the 
importance of microphyll woodland, North Baja proposes to minimize tree clearing in woodland areas by 
reducing the width of the construction right-of-way in certain locations. Based on field surveys, North 
Baja adopted a selection criteria that identified areas of vegetation with at least 20 percent crown cover 
within the non-construction or “passing lane” portion of the construction right-of-way where it proposes 
to minimize tree clearing by reducing the width of the right-of-way from 105 feet to 80 feet. The BLM 
and the CDFG approved this approach to identify tree groupings to be preserved during construction of 
North Baja’s A-Line. For the B-Line, North Baja identified 16 woodland areas of native trees (about 24.1 
acres) along the proposed route where the right-of-way width would be reduced. The reduction of the 
right-of-way width from 105 feet to 80 feet at these 16 areas would preserve 5.6 acres of desert wash 
woodland trees, which would reduce the amount new clearing in desert wash woodlands by about 20 
percent. Table 4.5.3-2 identifies the location and extent of these areas. 


4-72 


_ Acres of Vegetation Communities Affected by the Pipeline Facilities Associated with the N orth Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 

Creosote Bush Scrub _ Urban/Ruderal _ Agriculture _ Desert Wash Woodland a Desert Sand Dunes _ Total _ 

Facility _ Const. Oper. New Const. Oper. New Const. Oper. New Const. Oper. New Const. Oper. New Const. Oper. New 

B-Line 

Pipeline Facilities 


CO 

05 

in 




in 








CO 

d 

CO 

o 

CM 

co 


T—1 

in 

o 

o 

H 

co 

CNJ 

CM 

05 

•M- 

K 

<N 

CO 

o 

o 

cp 

CM 


ol 


o 

o 

ol 


O 

q 

q 

o 

o 

CM 

CM 

I s - 

Ol 

K 

o 

o 

, 

CO 

o 

o 

o 

in 

o 

o 

in 

d 

dl 

d 

o 

o 

dl 

O 

982.5 

125.6 

1108.1 

00 

CO 

50.4 

99.9 

1265.2 

4.4 

ol 

4.5 

o 

d 

00 

dl 

4.6 

o 

q 

q 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

Ol 

o 

o 

o 

°l 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

dl 

o 

o 

o 

dl 

d 

o 

o 

O 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

°| 

O 

o 

o 

°| 

o 

o 

o 

d 

o 

d 

o 

o 

o 

dl 

d 

o 

o 

dl 

C5 

o 

o 

O 

o 

o 

q 

q 

o 

°l 

o 

o 

o 

°l 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

dl 

d 

o 

o 

dl 

d 

CO 

•m- 

22.0 

o 

o 

q 

22.0 

o 

°l 

o 

o 

o 

°l 

o 

05 

c\i 

o 

o 

o 

o 

dl 

d 

o 

o 

dl 

d 

o 

o 

d 

o 

o 

q 

q 

o 

°| 

O 

o 

o 

°l 

C5 

o 

o 

d 

o 

o 

o 

o 

d 

dl 

d 

o 

o 

dl 

d 

CO 

q 

82.9 

o 

o 

q 

83.2 

o 

°l 

o 

o 

o 

°l 

o 

cn 


o 

o 

o 

d 

dl 

d 

o 

o 

dl 

d 

lO 

tT 

05 

o 

o 

q 

q 

o 

°l 

o 

o 

o 

Ol 

o 

00 


05 

o 

o 

o 

q 

o 

dl 

d 

d 

o 

dl 

d 

o 

O 

o 

o 

o 

q 

q 

o 

°| 

o 

o 

o 

°| 

o 

o 

d 

d 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

dl 

d 

d 

o 

dl 

d 

o 

r-. 

K 

o 

o 

CO 

O 

o 

°| 

o 

o 

o 

°l 

o 

00 

CM 

CO 

c\i 

CO 

o 

o 

CM 

If) 

CO 

o 

dl 

d 

o 

o 

dl 

d 

in 

o 

CO 

o 

o 

O 

in 

05 

°| 

05 

o 

o 

°l 

05 

o 

o 

d 


o 

o 


CM 

dl 

CM 

o 

o 

dl 

CM 

o 

o 

o 

CM 

o 

o 

CM 

o 

°| 

o 

o 

o 

°l 

d 

o 

o 

d 

d 

o 

o 

d 

o 

dl 

d 

o 

o 

dl 

d 

N; 

o 

K 

n; 

o 

■M; 

o 

M-' 

05 

°| 

05 

o 

o 

°l 

05 


o 



in 
■ ► 

o 

CO 

CM 

dl 

CM 

d 

o 

dl 

CM 



r—• 


NJ 


*■*. 








o 






Y— 








cd 

" T— 


CO 

O 

CM 

o 

q 

’-i 

q 

o 

o 

Y~| 

rv 

05 
^— 

CD 

CO 

CO 

CM 

in 

o 

o 

M- 

CM 

T— 

dl 


o 

o 

dl 

Y— 

o 

o 

O 

00 

o 

CM 

O 


°| 

N 

o 

o 

. 

co 

o 

o 

d 


o 

d 

in 

o 

dl 

d 

o 

o 

dl 

d 

761.2 

83.6 

844.8 

5.8 

5.0 

97.3 

952.9 

1.5 

dl 

CO 

Yy 

o 

o 

o 

o 

dl 

N. 

YY. 



CO 

l— 

Q) 

cS 

_i 

ED 

CD 


c/> 

<1) 


O 

CO 

LL 

O 

c 

© 

Cl 


o s 

■4? X 

LU 


CO 

Q) 


g> 

be 

CD 

C 

"q3 > 

Q_ CO 


^ o S 
(0 (0 ^ 
k a ^2 

X CO 

9- -x 


■o 

c 

D 

O 


Q> O 

r— 


32 t/5 

£ "O 

05 ® 
O)^ 


o>$ 2o 
#s w 2 

o '5 c 


.9- .2 o 5 o ,3 n a .S-o 

0.5 hS Q.^ < LL CL O 


w 

-O 

as 

o 

CC 

</5 

in 

a> 

o 

o 

< 


2 

-Q 

3 

CO 

8 

C5 

CO 

Uj 

CQ 


4-73 











Acres of Ve getation Communities Affected by the Pipeline Facilities Associated with the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project _ 

Creosote Bush Scrub Urban/Ruderal Agriculture Desert Wash Woodland a Desert Sand Dunes Total 


New 

360.2 

o 

co 

<■ 

403.2 

2.9 

22.7 

CM 

o 

o 

oi 

CM 

Y 

591.2 

93.0 

684.2 

9.7 

. 

CM 


CM 




fx 

CD 


od 


0 

CM 

o 

CM 


o 


CM 

CM 

o 

si 


Cl 

O 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

O 

O 

o 

o 

in 

o 



t— • 




>•» 





Const. 

360.2 

o 

co 

<■ 

403.2 

2.9 

LZZ 

CM 

440.0 

1347.1 

168.7 

1515.8 

9.7 

g 

i»» 

<- 


o 

o 

O 


i"- 

<■ 


o 

0 

z 

o 

< 

o 

Y'- 

o 

o 

o 


d 

<- 

o 

T — 

■M- 

o 

0 

o 

o 

O 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

O 

o 

CL 

o 

o 

o 

O 

o 

o 

o 

d 

o 

d 

d 

o 

0 

r- 

<■ 

t— 

o 

o 

CD 

42.0 


<- 

T— 

o 

C 

O 

o 

d 

<- 

o 

T— 

■M- 

o 

o 

o 

o 

<- 

o 

T*. 

■M- 

o 

5 

o 

o 

O 

o 

o 

o 

o 

p 

<■ 

O 

o 

0 

Z 

o 

o 

d 

o 

o 

o 

d 

d 

cvi 

EN 

CM 

o 

L 

0 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

Q. 

O 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

d 

o 

o 

d 

o 

0 

r— 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

cq 

co 

82.9 

o 

i— 

o 

O 

o 

o 

d 

d 

o 

o 

d 

in 


o 

g 

o 

h- 

K 

o 

o 

o 

k 

in 


co 

o 

0 

z 


<■ 

id 

d 

o 

d 

ici 

oi 

d 

CM 

£ 

Co 

d 

l! 

0 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

CD 

o 

O 

o 

o 

CL 

o 

o 

o 

d 

o 

o 

o 

d 

d 

o 

d 

o 

0 

o 

i'- 

N. 

o 

o 


oq 

o 

<■ 

■M- 

o 

c 

o 

O 


<■ 

id 

Y— 

o 

o 

d 

Y— 

CM 

oi 

CM 

oi 

< 


d 


N- 


Y— 




CO 

T“ 


in 


0 

in 

<■ 

d 

in 

22.7 

o 


oi 

<■ 

Fii 

in 

z 

<■ 

CM 

CO 


CM 

o 

N. 

CM 

<■ 

CM 

CO 

IP 

CM 

co 

u 

0 

t-'. 

o 

59.7 

CM 

o 

o 

Od 

N- 

o 

K 

<• 

Q- 

O 

d 

m 

o 

o 

o 

o 

oi 

LO 

oi 

in 

o 

oi 

in 

o 

0 

C 

N; 

in 

<■ 

Y— 

d 

in 

22.7 

p 

CO 

IP 

co 

d 

<- 

K 

oi 

in 

o 

<■ 

co 

5- 

cvi 

T— 


cn 

co 

CO 

co 

O 

CM 


CM 



CM 

co 


CO 


New 

72.8 

24.5 

97.3 

0.4 

00 

0.2 

97.9 

272.3 

Z09 

333.0 

6.2 

u 

0 

in 

o 

42.5 

CM 

o 


00 

CM 

o 

43.2 

o 

CL 

o 

CM 

< 

d 

o 

o 

o 

CM 

CO 

<■ 

d 

oi 

Const. 

72.8 

24.5 

97.3 

0.4 

00 

2.9 

100.6 

835.5 

108.2 

943.7 

6.2 


CM 

CM 


o 

d 


CO 


ol 


C\J 


o oi 
d ol 


o 

o 


o| 

ol 


O 0)1 

d ol 


o 

d 


o 

o 


§1 


o| 

ol 


o col 
d ol 


o 

o 


o 

d 


o 

o 


t''- 

cvi 

CM 


o 

o 


oo 

o 


o 

o 


o 

o 


o 

in 


o| 

ol 


o| 

ol 


coi 


m| 

ol 


co 

d 

o 


T- 

o 

rZ 

o 

T— 

o 


T“ 


O 

00 

o 

o 

o 

T_ 


oo 

o 

oi 

o 

i"» 

o 

o 

t— 


-r- 


< 

in 

o 

o 

d 

o 

o 

in 

CM 

< 

CM 

O 


c\i 

CM 

cd 

o 

o 

o 

d 

CM 

o> 

CO 

oo 

<■ 

CO 

o 

in 

CO 

in 

o 

o 

d 

o 

00 


d 

00 

d 

h- 

OD 

od 

N. 

CM 

od 

co 

^_ 

CO 

d 

in 

co 

in 

CD 

p 

CM 

<• 

< 

d 

CM 

r»- 

<■ 

oi 

CO 

CO 

<■ 

CO 

h- 

od 

<■ 

<- 

<■ 

CM 


in 

N; 

in 


o 

CD 


o 

« 

LL 


5 

0 

CO 


10 
0) 

—: _i_ 

S O) 

8 = 
0) 
c 


o 2 


CD 


111 

^8 O 
CO CO .CD 


-o 

c 

3 

o 


= -o 
CD « 

0 s- 
O)^ 
CO 


0 

c 


0 

Q_ 


0 >» 
Q_ 0 

CL § 


° s- 

9- 


^ - 


t o 


^ S o) o 2 o 

CD o W S 

£=5^5 Oo as 

CD 2 . CD ,5 « - O 

I- 5 Q.C/) < LL 0. O 

5 


2 cc 


CD 

O 

o 

< 


a 

o 

S 

3 

CO 

S 

CD 


0 

0 


0 

k_ 

X 

LU 


0 

0 


0 

O 

h- 

o 

0 

o 

k_ 

CL 


"O 

C 

3 

o 


■-= g> 

O OC C? o CD 

m 2 co i? 5 "a ^ co 

U- CD r> <2- LL <0 

<1) •_= O.J2 ® .2 < •- 

c c) >, c i .c j; £ ~ 

1 ,9-5 * -° ^ - 2 y 


P (0 
£ "P 

03 to w 
(D v ' 7_l 


CD' 

CO 


qj c w .w. r\ r\ 0 (— 

1 .9-5 «S ES .&§ 

Q. CL > |— § <110.0 

n t 


TO 

CO 

o 

CC 


CD CD £ CD w 

(1)3 W ® 0 

" — 0 
o 
o 
< 


CO 
■*—* 
o 


o 

0 


0 

O 


c 

0 

O 

i_ 

0 

CL 


4-74 



















5 

© 


c 

o 

o 


CO 

If) 

TT 

LLI 

_J 

CO 

< 


© 


111 

© 

_c 

■© 

Q. 


© 

‘ra 

GO 


© 


TJ 

© 

© 

o 

o 

« 

© 


© 

Ql 


© 

.c 

•4—< 
> 
JQ 

T3 

© 

■4-4 

o 

© 


c 

3 

E 

E 

o 

o 

c 

o 

4-* 

© 

-4-* 

© 

O) 

© 

> 

o 

© 

© 

k_ 

o 

< 


© 


XI 

3 

l_ 

O 

CO 

1= 

w 

3 

CD 

© 

o 

w 

o 

© 

k_ 

O 


CM 

I 

CO 

in 

■M" 

© 

JO 

© 

I— 

© 

© 

■iH- 

T) 

© 

O 

3 
T3 
© 

4 _ 

© 

© 

5 


■g 

5 

>. 

© 

§ 


J3 
O) 


© 


© 

© 

sz 

5 

v_ 

CD 

> 

O 

o 

CD 

CD 


C 

0 

o 

1— 

0 

CL 

O 

OsJ 

CO 

0 

0 

0 


0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

"O 

_3 

o 

.c 

0 

0 

i_ 

O 

< 


c 

o 

o 

13 

■*—> 

0 

c 

o 

O 

II 

0 

C 

o 

O 


0 

c 


< 

0 

JC 


c 

o 

o 

3 

4 —* 

w 

c 

o 

o 

05 

c 

4 _ 

3 

"O 

TO 

© 

XI 

4 

3 

© 

T3 

O 

c 

© 


© 

o 

c 

© 

XI 


w 


£5 £ 
© 7? 

Q. $ 

O ® 

II ^ 
. II 

Q. © 

O Z 


4-75 











TABLE 4.5.3-2 

Locations Along the B-Line Where the Construction Right-of-Way 

Would be Reduced to 80 Feet to Minimize Tree Clearing 

Starting Milepost 

Length (feet) 

Crown Cover (percent) 

Previous Disturbance (A-Line) (acres) 

New Disturbance (acres) 

16.9 

345 

25 



0.4 

0.2 

17.9 

270 

31 



0.3 

0.2 

20.0 

700 

30 



0.8 

0.5 

22.3 

480 

20 



0.6 

0.3 

22.5 

250 

43 



0.3 

0.2 

22.6 

1,000 

33 



1.1 

0.7 

22.8 

180 

42 



0.2 

0.1 

23.3 

340 

50 



0.4 

0.2 

23.4 

250 

63 



0.3 

0.2 

23.5 

590 

41 



0.7 

0.4 

25.8 

850 

35 



1.0 

0.6 

34.5 

860 

25 



1.0 

0.6 

45.1 

500 

48 



0.6 

0.3 

51.1 

1,800 

30 



2.1 

1.2 

51.7 

1,100 

30 



1.3 

0.8 

64.5 

500 

31 



0.6 

0.3 

Total 

10,015 




11.7 

6.8 


As proposed in the CM&R Plan, trees that cannot be avoided would be subjected to one of 
several treatments (prune, limb, or remove) based on proximity to the pipeline centerline. By pruning or 
limbing trees rather than removing them, many trees within the right-of-way would be preserved. 

During the scoping process, the FWS identified impacts on desert wash woodland as a significant 
concern and requested that mitigation/restoration efforts be concentrated in the desert wash woodlands 
that would be crossed by the B-Line north and adjacent to the Cibola NWR and the Milpitas Wash. 
Additionally, the FWS suggested that North Baja consider conducting vegetation maintenance (i.e., 
noxious weed control) beyond the limits of the construction right-of-way in areas of microphyll woodland 
as part of off-site mitigation. As noted in North Baja’s CM&R Plan, tree and shrub seedling recruitment 
was generally higher in areas of desert wash woodlands than in areas of creosote bush scrub. Moreover, 
seedling recruitment within the disturbed right-of-way was generally higher than in control plots located 
off of the right-of-way. Noxious weeds (e.g., African mustard and tamarisk), while present, were found 
in areas where weeds were present before construction. North Baja proposes to conduct the same 
restoration and maintenance activities for desert wash woodland that were conducted for the A-Line, 
which, as evidenced by the results of North Baja’s mitigation and monitoring reports, were successful. 

As was required by the CDFG to construct the A-Line, North Baja proposes compensatory 
mitigation for the loss of desert wash woodland vegetation. North Baja proposes an assessed financial 
contribution at a 2:1 ratio for the clearing of the 22.0 acres (new disturbance) of desert wash woodland in 
addition to the 1:1 compensation ratio it proposes to offset impacts on desert tortoise habitat. North Baja 
would negotiate off-site mitigation requirements with the FWS and the CDFG (see Section 4.7). 

The BLM identified the Milpitas Wash SMA as a significant concern, noting that it consists of 
relatively unfragmented native vegetation communities. Further detail regarding the potential effects of 
the Project on managed wildlife habitats, including the Milpitas Wash SMA, is included in Section 
4.6.2.4. 


4-76 





No impact on the riparian corridor adjacent to the Colorado River is anticipated because the 
crossing would be completed using the HDD method. The HDD would pass 60 feet below the bed of the 
Colorado River. Because the root zones of the vegetation adjacent to the Colorado River are primarily 
less than 15 feet deep, the adjacent riparian vegetation would not be affected by the HDD and removal of 
riparian vegetation along the Colorado River would not occur during construction or maintenance of the 
pipeline. Therefore, the habitat diversity added to the region by the Colorado River and its adjacent 
vegetation would not be compromised by the proposed Project. Similarly, implementation of the HDDs at 
the All-American Canal would avoid impacts on the riparian vegetation at these crossing locations. 

Open-cut trenching through Rannells Drain (MP 11.4) would have a short-term impact on both 
wetland (cattails and bulrush) and upland (arrow weed, quailbush, and tamarisk) vegetation growing in 
and on the steep banks of the drain. This vegetation is routinely removed during drain maintenance by 
the PVID. The banks of the drain would be restored and stabilized following construction (see Section 
4.2.4). Because vegetation has re-established following the construction of the A-Line in 2002, the 
Agency Staffs expect that the vegetation in Rannells Drain would regenerate on its own from existing 
seed and vegetative propagules within 2 years after construction. 

Construction of the B-Line (primarily along 18 th Avenue) and the IID Lateral (primarily along 
Hunt Road and East Ross Road) could affect mature landscaping associated with residential development. 
In many cases this mature vegetation provides shade and helps attenuate the effects of ambient dust. A 
total of 11 residences along the B-Line were identified where construction would affect landscaping. 
Impacts on landscaping along the BEI and IID Laterals would largely be avoided. Based on North Baja’s 
evaluation, no trees on residential properties are proposed for removal. Mitigation measures such as tree 
protection fencing would be employed to protect existing trees during construction. North Baja would 
restore landscaping following construction as part of site-specific plans. If mature trees or shrubs need to 
be removed during construction, landowners would be compensated for the loss of irreplaceable 
vegetation as part of agreements between North Baja and the landowners. Additional information about 
impacts on and potential mitigation measures for residential areas, including landscaping, is presented in 
Section 4.8.3. 

To reduce impacts on vegetation within the construction and permanent rights-of-way and 
improve revegetation potential, North Baja would implement its CM&R Plan (see Appendix E). 
Specifically, North Baja would implement the following measures that were found to be successful for the 
A-Line: 

• Segregate topsoil in all agricultural areas and in native habitats where grading is required. 
This measure would preserve the superior chemical and biological qualities of the topsoil 
and, in nonagricultural habitats, would preserve the native seed bank contained in the 
soil. 

• Crush or skim vegetation within the construction right-of-way in areas where grading is 
not required, which would result in less soil disturbance. The remaining root crowns 
would aid in soil stabilization, help retain organic matter in the soil, aid in moisture 
retention, and have the potential to resprout following construction. 

• Preserve native vegetation removed during clearing operations. The cut vegetation would 
be windrowed along the right-of-way during construction and then respread over the 
disturbed areas as part of restoration activities. This measure would be considered 
“vertical mulch” and would aid in seedling recruitment by trapping seeds, providing 
shade, and improving water infiltration. Additionally, this cut vegetation would add to 
the organic matter in the topsoil layer as it decomposes. 


4-77 


• Replant large intact specimens at specified locations along the right-of-way providing a 
visual barrier to the right-of-way to deter OHV traffic on the right-of-way (see Section 
4.8.5). Although this vegetation would not be expected to survive, it would provide 
many of the benefits of vertical mulch described above in addition to preventing 
vegetation damage by OHV use on the right-of-way. 

• Recontour disturbed areas as needed. The contours would be reshaped after backfilling 
the trench and replacing the topsoil to restore preconstruction contours and natural 
drainage patterns. This treatment would reduce erosion and the loss of topsoil, which 
would improve revegetation potential. 

• Imprint areas of soil disturbance using a “sheep’s-foot” roller or other methods. 
Imprinting would provide micro-catchment areas for seed retention and would improve 
water infiltration. 

• Maintain water flow in crop irrigation systems, unless shutoff is coordinated with 
affected parties. 

• Test for and alleviate compacted soils in agricultural and residential areas. In Section 
4.2.3, the Agency Staffs included a recommendation that North Baja revise its CM&R 
Plan to include provisions for limited testing for compaction in desert areas and measures 
to alleviate compaction if identified in these areas. 

• Implement procedures to prevent or minimize the spread of noxious weeds or other 
undesirable species by limiting disposal of plant materials to suitable areas and the 
cleaning of clearing and grading equipment before beginning work on the Project (see 
Section 4.5.5). 

• Monitor the revegetation of the right-of-way the year following construction and again 
during the second growing season. In agricultural areas, crop monitoring would be 
conducted to determine if additional restoration is required. Additional revegetation 
efforts would be conducted until revegetation is deemed successful. In non-agricultural 
lands, revegetation monitoring would be conducted until 2012 and would be considered 
successful if upon visual survey, the density and cover are similar to adjacent undisturbed 
lands. 

Although construction of the pipeline facilities would result in long-term impacts on about 
1,067.7 acres of native desert vegetation (i.e., creosote bush scrub, desert wash woodland, and desert sand 
dunes). North Baja’s plan to overlap its construction right-of-way onto its existing pipeline right-of-way 
would reduce new impacts on undisturbed desert vegetation by about 63 percent. North Baja’s plan to 
reduce its construction right-of-way through areas of desert wash woodland would further reduce impact 
on desert vegetation types and the implementation of its CM&R Plan would improve the success of 
natural restoration. The North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project would not represent a significant impact 
on vegetation because the Sonoran Desert encompasses more than 5.4 million acres in southeast 
California alone (Ceres 2006), and the Project would affect less than 0.01 percent of the regional desert 
vegetation type. Therefore, impacts on vegetation would be considered less than significant. 

During the scoping process, several landowners expressed concern about the removal of native 
desert vegetation. As discussed above, the re vegetation of desert areas could take from 5 to 50 years. A 
review of North Baja’s post-construction monitoring reports for the A-Line indicates that following 
construction in 2002, natural seedling recruitment along the construction right-of-way has occurred within 


4-78 


creosote bush scrub and desert wash woodlands. Seedlings of both annual species and perennial shrubs 
and trees were found growing on the right-of-way during annual vegetation monitoring. 

As discussed in Section 4.2.4, the BLM would need to assess potential impacts on rangeland 
health on BLM lands attributable to the Project. One of the attributes that would be assessed is the 
integrity of the biotic community (i.e., the capacity of the area to support characteristic functional and 
structural communities, to resist loss of this function and structure due to disturbance, and to recover 
following disturbance [Pellant et al. 2005]). The removal of desert vegetation and disturbance of soils 
could affect the ability of the Project area to support vegetation and wildlife communities. However, 
North Baja’s CM&R Plan, which includes measures to control erosion and preserve topsoil and scarce 
organic matter, would minimize impacts on the revegetation potential of the Project area. Similar 
measures were implemented during construction and restoration of the A-Line, and the results of 
revegetation monitoring indicate that revegetation is occurring within the disturbed areas. 

All of the vegetation communities affected by the Project would be susceptible to secondary 
impacts related to soil contamination by materials used during construction activities. While these 
impacts would typically be minor because of the low frequency and volumes of these occurrences, the 
introduction of contaminants to soils could adversely affect the potential for revegetation. North Baja’s 
SPCC Plan specifies cleanup procedures to minimize the potential for soil contamination from spills or 
leaks of fuels, lubricants, and coolants (see Appendix F). Adherence to North Baja’s SPCC Plan would 
reduce the potential for a spill or leak to contaminate the soil to the extent of eradicating existing 
vegetation, inhibiting revegetation, or migrating to other areas and affecting soil and water ecology via 
erosion and sedimentation to a less than significant level. 

Aboveground Facilities 

The modifications proposed at the Ehrenberg Compressor Station would not permanently affect 
additional vegetation resources, although about 0.7 acre of the urban/ruderal community would be 
temporarily affected by the installation of header piping. Construction of the Blythe Meter Station would 
permanently affect 4.3 acres of the creosote bush scrub community. At the Ogilby Meter Station, 0.4 acre 
of the creosote bush scrub community would be permanently affected by construction of an odorant 
facility and a pig launcher and receiver. Construction of the El Centro Meter Station would temporarily 
affect 2.5 acres and permanently affect 0.2 acre of the urban/ruderal community, all of which occurs 
within the existing fenceline of the IID El Centro Generating Station. 

The four valves along the B-Line that would require an expansion of existing valve sites (valve #s 
2, 5, 6, and 7) would permanently affect 0.3 acre of urban/ruderal and 0.8 acre of creosote bush scrub 
communities. The three valves to be constructed along the IID Lateral would each affect less than 0.1 
acre of the desert sand dune (valve #2), creosote bush scrub (valve #3), and agricultural (valve #4) 
communities. 

Construction and operation of the pig launcher and receiver proposed at Rannells Trap would 
affect 0.3 acre of the creosote bush scrub community. Permanent impacts on about 0.2 acre of the 
creosote bush scrub community would result from the construction of the tap to the B-Line and the pig 
launcher associated with the IID Lateral. 

Access Roads 

The construction, modification, and improvement to access roads used during construction of the 
proposed expansion Project would primarily have temporary impacts on vegetation resources. Access 
road disturbance associated with the B-Line would temporarily affect 97.3 acres of the creosote bush 


4-79 


scrub community, 2.3 acres of the agricultural community, and 0.3 acre of desert wash woodland. About 
0.2 acre of creosote bush scrub would be permanently affected by the construction of a permanent access 
road to the Ogilby Meter Station. For the BEI Lateral, a new permanent access road would be 
constructed, affecting about 0.1 acre of the creosote bush scrub community. Access roads associated with 
the IID Lateral would temporarily affect 6.1 acres of agricultural, 2.9 acres of creosote bush scrub, 1.3 
acres of urban/ruderal, and 0.9 acre of desert sand dunes communities. About 0.1 acre of the creosote 
bush scrub community would be permanently affected by construction of the permanent access road to 
the tap facility. 

Pipe Storage and Contractor Yards 

The temporary use of four pipe storage and contractor yards would temporarily affect 68.1 acres 
of the urban/ruderal community and 5.0 acres of the creosote bush scrub community. No permanent 
impacts on vegetation would result from the use of these sites. 

4.5.4 Vegetation Communities of Special Concern or Value 

No designated vegetation communities of special concern or value were identified along the 
proposed pipeline routes or at aboveground facility sites. 

Because no vegetation communities of special concern or value would be affected and any 
riparian vegetation crossed would be largely avoided, the potential for the Project to result in the long¬ 
term (more than 5 years) reduction or alteration of unique, rare, or special concern vegetation types; 
riparian vegetation; or natural communities would be less than significant. 

4.5.5 Noxious Weeds and Other Invasive Plants 

Noxious weeds and other invasive plants are non-native, undesirable native, or introduced species 
that are able to exclude and outcompete desirable native species, and thereby decrease overall species 
diversity. Noxious weeds often invade and persist in areas after disturbance (e.g., after construction of a 
pipeline) and can hinder restoration. Other aggressive plant species, both native and introduced, may also 
outcompete desirable native and other beneficial species. Noxious weeds are addressed by Executive 
Order 13112 (February 1999), which directs Federal agencies to prevent the introduction of invasive 
species; provide for their control; and minimize the economic, ecological, and human health impacts that 
invasive species cause. The order further specifies that a Federal agency shall not authorize, fund, or 
carry out actions likely to cause or promote the introduction or spread of invasive species in the United 
States or elsewhere unless it has determined that the benefits of such actions outweigh the potential harm 
caused by invasive species and that all feasible and prudent measures to minimize risk of harm would be 
taken in conjunction with the actions. 

The removal of existing vegetation and the disturbance of soils during construction could create 
conditions for the invasion and establishment of exotic-nuisance species. Construction equipment 
traveling from invasive weed-infested areas into weed-free areas could also facilitate the dispersal of 
invasive weed seed and propagules and result in the establishment of noxious weeds in weed-free areas. 
The spread of exotic or noxious weeds has been identified as one of the most harmful threats to the 
biodiversity of the Sonoran Desert area (Marshall et al. 2000). The potential severity of the noxious weed 
impacts depends upon the species, the prevalence in the area before construction, and the intensity of the 
construction-induced dispersal. 

Botanical surveys for the A-Line were conducted using the California Invasive Plant Council’s 
(CEPC) List A and Red Alert lists to identify invasive weed species. Four invasive species were identified 


4-80 


in significant numbers; African mustard, Australian saltbush, fountain grass, and tamarisk. No Red Alert 
species were found. North Baja conducted post-construction weed and revegetation surveys for the A- 
Line, the most recent of which occurred in the Spring of 2005. The surveys indicate that although weeds 
(specifically mustard and tamarisk) have reoccurred in areas where they were present before construction 
of the A-Line, they have not spread to new areas along the right-of-way. Additionally, the surveys 
indicate that fountain grass has been eliminated from the right-of-way. Because there has been no 
spreading of noxious weeds as a result of construction of the A-Line, North Baja has not conducted post¬ 
construction noxious weed control measures with the exception of manual removal of tamarisk during 
revegetation surveys. 

Tamarisk was identified along the BEI Lateral route. North Baja has not yet provided 
information regarding noxious weed species that may occur along the IID Lateral route; however, in 
accordance with the CM&R Plan (see Appendix E), surveys for noxious weeds along the IID Lateral 
would be conducted before construction. 

The use of construction equipment and the importation of Project materials from areas outside the 
local region could introduce weed or soil pests that could interfere with crop production or successful 
revegetation of natural communities. North Baja would reduce the potential to spread noxious weeds and 
soil pests by implementing the measures that were successful during construction of the A-Line. These 
measures include: 

• In accordance with Executive Order 13112, the construction area within lands 
administered by the BLM would be surveyed by a qualified noxious weed authority that 
would identify all noxious weeds present and provide a list to the authorized officer. A 
determination would be made by the authorized officer of any noxious weeds that require 
flagging for treatment before construction. Treatment would be according to the 
instructions of the authorized officer. Only BLM-approved herbicides would be used on 
BLM lands, and North Baja would coordinate with the appropriate BLM office prior to 
use of herbicides. Any use of herbicides in California would be handled by properly 
licensed county agricultural agents. 

• Before construction, populations of plants listed as invasive exotics by the CIPC in its 
most recent invasive plant List A (including lists A-l and A-2) and Red Alert list, as well 
as any other species listed on the BLM National List of Invasive Weed Species of 
Concern would be identified on the ground and on maps through a preconstruction 
survey. This would establish a baseline from which to evaluate post-construction 
monitoring surveys. 

• Disposal of soil and plant materials from non-native areas would not be allowed in native 
areas. Weed propagules or soil pests that could occur in excess spoils or plant materials 
from non-native areas would not be allowed to be transferred to or disposed of within 
areas comprising native vegetation communities. 

• All construction equipment would be washed before beginning work on the Project, 
equipment working in Arizona would be cleaned before beginning work in California, 
and equipment used to clear tamarisk would be washed before working elsewhere on the 
Project to prevent the spread of invasive weeds from other areas. Equipment would be 
washed at existing commercial wash stations. 

• Construction personnel would be educated on weed identification and the importance of 
controlling and preventing the spread of invasive non-native species. 


4-81 


• Gravel and/or fill material to be placed in relatively weed-free areas would come from 
weed-free sources. Certified weed-free hay bales would be used. Post-construction 
monitoring and treatment of invasive weeds would be implemented. 

• Tamarisk trees would be removed from all portions of the right-of-way in native areas. 
In non-native areas, tamarisk trees would be removed as necessary as part of clearing 
operations. To prevent dispersal of tamarisk propagules, debris would either be burned 
onsite under an appropriate burning permit or hauled offsite. All loads hauled offsite 
would be properly covered to prevent the spread of propagules by wind. On federally 
administered lands, tamarisk debris would be hauled offsite and disposed of at an 
approved disposal site. Burning on Federal lands would require the approval of the 
authorized officer. 

The portion of the Cibola NWR that would be crossed is dominated by a tamarisk monoculture 
both within the proposed right-of-way and areas adjacent to the right-of-way; therefore, attempting to 
control tamarisk in these areas would not be practical. During the scoping process, representatives from 
the Cibola NWR suggested that North Baja offset Project-related impacts on vegetation in the Cibola 
NWR by conducting tamarisk control outside the Project area in native stands of mesquite for a period of 
3 to 4 years. Specific restoration measures conducted within the Cibola NWR would be determined 
during easement negotiations with the NWR. 

North Baja would continue to conduct surveys for non-native plant species after construction is 
complete. The results of these surveys would be compared to the preconstruction surveys and to surveys 
from prior years to determine locations of weed infestations attributable to the Project. North Baja would 
conduct surveys and implement control measures (e.g., herbicide application, pulling by hand as 
permitted by landowner or land management agency) at Project-related infestations twice a year for 2 
years after construction is complete or until the infestations have been controlled. North Baja would also 
implement weed control measures annually as part of routine operation and maintenance of the pipeline. 

In its CM&R Plan, North Baja states that it would not employ the use of wash stations along the 
construction right-of-way to clean equipment moving from weed-infested areas to non-weed-infested 
native areas because many of the weeds (e.g., African mustard and Schismus sp.) are ubiquitous on and 
off of the right-of-way and; therefore, attempts at control would not be effective. The Agency Staffs 
believe that at locations where populations of African mustard, Schismus, or tamarisk are adjacent to 
areas that are relatively free of these species, weed wash stations could be effective in preventing the 
spread of these weed species to currently non-infested areas. In addition, the BLM indicated that it would 
require North Baja to treat all weeds within the disturbed right-of-way. Therefore, the Agency Staffs 
recommend that: 

• North Baja shall consult with the BLM and revise its CM&R Plan to incorporate 
the BLM’s weed control requirements. The revised CM&R Plan shall also include a 
plan for weed wash stations to be established along the construction right-of-way to 
clean all equipment after working in weed-infested areas prior to entering non- 
weed-infested areas. The specific locations of the weed wash stations shall be 
identified by the El. If following clearing, the topsoil in weed-infested areas is 
segregated from the entire construction area, further equipment washing would not 
be necessary until topsoil restoration is conducted. The plan shall indicate the 
methods proposed for equipment washing (e.g., high pressure water or compressed 
air) and measures to prevent wash water (if used) from affecting non-weed-infested 
areas. North Baja shall file the revised CM&R Plan and documentation of BLM 
approval of the plan with the FERC and the CSLC for the review and written 


4-82 


approval of the Director of OEP and the Executive Officer of the CSLC before 
construction. 


Implementation of the mitigation measures proposed by North Baja and the additional 
recommendation of the Agency Staffs would reduce the potential for the Project to introduce new, or lead 
to the expanded range of existing, invasive noxious weed species or soil pests, so that they interfere with 
crop production or successful revegetation of natural communities to a less than significant level. 

4.5.6 Arrowhead Alternative 

The Arrowhead Extension would cross about 1.0 mile of the urban/ruderal community and about 
1.1 miles of the agricultural community resulting in temporary construction impacts on about 7.2 acres 
and 16.1 acres of the urban/ruderal and agricultural communities, respectively. No long-term or 
permanent impacts on vegetation resources would result from construction of the pipeline facilities. 

The Blythe-Arrowhead Meter Station and pig receiver would be within the existing SoCal Gas 
Blythe Compressor Station site and would not affect additional vegetation resources. The pig launcher, 
taps, and crossover piping would be within the agricultural community temporarily affecting about 1.0 
acre during construction and permanently affecting 0.8 acre during operation. 

Impacts on and mitigation for the agricultural and urban/ruderal communities would be the same 
as described in Section 4.5.3. No communities of special concern or value would be affected by the 
Arrowhead Alternative. 

Noxious weeds are not likely to be a concern in the agricultural and urban/ruderal communities 
along the Arrowhead Extension because of cultivation and maintenance practices typically conducted in 
these areas. If present, weed infestations would be treated as described in Section 4.5.5. 

4.5.7 No Project Alternative 

Under the No Project Alternative, the FERC would deny North Baja’s application for a 
Certificate and a Presidential Permit amendment, the CSLC would deny North Baja’s application for an 
amendment to its right-of-way lease across California’s Sovereign and School Lands, and the BLM would 
deny North Baja’s application to amend its existing Right-of-Way Grant and obtain a Temporary Use 
Permit for the portion of the Project on Federal lands. The No Project Alternative means that the Project 
would not go forward and the Project-related facilities would not be installed. Accordingly, none of the 
potential environmental impacts identified for the construction and operation of the proposed Project 
would occur. 

Because the proposed Project is privately funded, it is unknown whether North Baja would fund 
another energy project in California. However, should the No Project Alternative be selected, the energy 
needs identified in Section 1.1 would likely be addressed through other means, such as through other 
LNG or natural gas-related pipeline projects. Such projects may result in potential environmental impacts 
of the nature and magnitude of the proposed Project as well as impacts particular to their respective 
configurations and operations; however, these impacts cannot be predicted with any certainty at this time. 


4-83 




4.6 WILDLIFE AND AQUATIC RESOURCES 

4.6.1 Significance Criteria 

An adverse impact on wildlife and aquatic resources would be considered significant and would 
require mitigation if Project construction or operation would: 

• change the diversity or substantially alter the numbers of a local population of any 
wildlife or aquatic species, or interfere with the survival, growth, or reproduction of 
affected wildlife and fish populations; 

• substantially interfere with the movement or range of migratory birds and other wildlife, 
or the movement, range, or spawning of any resident or anadromous fish; 

• substantially reduce the abundance of species under the protection of the Migratory Bird 
Treaty Act; 

• result in a substantial long-term loss of existing wildlife or aquatic habitat; 

• cause substantial deterioration of existing fish habitat; or 

• create a potential health hazard or involve the use, production, or disposal of materials 
that pose a hazard to wildlife or fish populations in the Project area. 

4.6.2 Wildlife 

4.6.2.1 Existing Wildlife Resources 

In general, large mammals, except for the coyote, are unusual in the Project area (Brown 1982). 
However, mule deer, desert bighorn sheep, mountain lion, and wild horses and burros could occur as 
transients. Most of the mammals common to the general Project area have adapted to high diurnal 
temperatures by spending much of the day underground or aestivating. Consequently, the area may host 
large populations of burrowing rodents. 

With the exception of microphyll woodlands, the open, sparsely vegetated habitats of the Project 
area do not typically support diverse avifauna that are usually associated with structurally taller and 
denser habitats found in areas receiving more annual rainfall (Brown 1982). The Project area’s avian 
inhabitants are largely arid-adapted desert species. 

Rock outcrops, bajadas, 1 washes, and gravel plains each support a varied and often different 
herpetofauna; however, certain species are common across most habitats (Brown 1982). 

Pipeline Facilities 

As described in Section 4.5, the proposed pipeline facilities would cross five distinct upland 
vegetation communities. Each of these communities provides nesting, cover, and foraging habitat for a 
variety of wildlife. Other resources including open water and wetland habitats also provide these same 
functions for wildlife species. Impacts on these resources are described and quantified in Sections 4.3.2, 
4.4, and 4.5, respectively. Table 4.6.2-1 identifies some of the wildlife species that are common to these 

' Bajadas generally consist of shallow slopes at the base of rocky hills, typically exhibiting deep soils and a more complex soil structure that 
retains water and supports a diverse vegetation community. 


4-84 



habitats. The most prevalent habitat is creosote bush scrub, accounting for about 61 percent of the 
wildlife habitat that would be affected. Although creosote bush scrub is the most common habitat type 
affected by the Project, many more wildlife species depend on desert wash woodland and wetland areas 
for their sources of water, cover, and forage. Desert wash woodlands account for about 5 percent and 
wetlands account for about 2 percent of the habitat affected. The urban/ruderal community, which 
provides the least favorable wildlife habitat, is the next most prevalent community accounting for about 
24 percent of the habitat affected. Other habitats that would be affected are agricultural (5 percent) and 
desert sand dunes (3 percent). 


TABLE 4.6.2-1 


Species 

Mammals 


Birds 


Reptiles 


Wildlife Species by Habitat Type Common in the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project Area 

Habitat Type 

Creosote bush scrub/desert wash woodland/wetland/riparian: mountain lion, coyote, mule (burro) deer, 
desert bighorn sheep, feral burro, coyote, striped skunk, desert shrew, white-tailed antelope, squirrel 
desert pocket mouse, desert kangaroo rat, Merriam kangaroo rat, white-throated woodrat, long-tailed 
pocket mouse, round-tailed ground squirrel, desert cottontail rabbit, kit fox, southwestern yellow bat, little 
brown myotis, western mastiff bat, western pipistrelle, pallid bat, cave myotis, and California myotis. 

Dune areas: Coyote, mule deer, rabbit, ground squirrels, desert kangaroo rat. 

Aqricultural/urban/Ruderal: Opossum. 

Sonoran creosote bush scrub/desert wash woodland/wetland/riparian: Burrowing owl, red-tailed hawk, 
Gambel’s quail, cactus wren, Anna’s hummingbird, Gila woodpecker, white-winged dove, mourning dove, 
white-winged dove, greater roadrunner, lesser nighthawk, common raven, verdin, black-tailed 
gnatcatcher, black-throated sparrow, Say’s phoebe, ash-throated flycatcher, and loggerhead shrike. 

Agricultural/Urban/Ruderal Land: European starling, American crow, mockingbird, house finch, and great 
egret. 

Sonoran creosote bush scrub/desert wash woodland/wetland/riparian: Desert glossy snake, western 
whiptail, sidewinder, southern desert whiptail, gopher snake, chuckwalla, Mojave fringe-toed lizard, 
Colorado fringe-toed lizard, side-blotched lizard, desert night lizard, zebra-tailed lizard, side-blotched 
lizard. 

Dune areas: banded gecko, flat-tailed horned lizard (edges of sand dune area). 


Sources: Holland and Keil 1995; BLM 2006. 


Aboveground Facilities 

Wildlife use of the areas of the proposed aboveground facility sites is similar to adjacent habitats. 
Limited wildlife habitat exists in the agricultural land adjacent to the Ehrenberg Compressor Station and 
the El Paso Meter Station. Wildlife use of the Rannells Trap site is similar to that described above for 
creosote bush scrub habitats. The Blythe Meter Station site consists of urban/ruderal community; 
consequently, wildlife habitat is minimal. Wildlife use of the Ogilby Meter Station location is limited due 
to the disturbed nature of the area and its proximity to Interstate 8. The El Centro Meter Station occurs 
within the urban/ruderal community and would be located within a previously developed area with 
minimal habitat value. 

Valve sites along the B-Line are generally collocated with existing facilities, although four valve 
sites would be expanded and would permanently affect agricultural and creosote bush scrub habitats. 
Construction of the three valves along the IID Lateral that would be outside of existing facility sites 
would affect creosote bush scrub, desert sand dune, and agricultural habitat. 

Creosote bush scrub habitat would be affected by the pig launcher and receiver that would be 
constructed at Rannells Trap and the tap to the B-Line and pig launcher associated with the IID Lateral. 


4-85 













Pipe Storage and Contractor Yards 

The proposed pipe storage and contractor yards would all be located in urban/ruderal and creosote 
bush scrub habitat types at previously disturbed sites. 

Access Roads 

The construction of new temporary and permanent access roads would primarily affect creosote 
bush scrub habitat, although agricultural, urban/ruderal, and desert sand dune habitats would also be 
affected. 

4.6.2.2 General Impact and Mitigation 
Pipeline Facilities 

The impact of the Project on wildlife species and their habitats would vary depending on the 
requirements of each species and the existing habitat present in the areas crossed by the pipeline facilities. 
Direct impacts of construction on wildlife would include the displacement of wildlife on the right-of-way 
and direct mortality of some individuals. Wildlife, such as birds and larger mammals, would leave the 
vicinity of the right-of-way as construction activities approach. Depending on the season, construction 
could also disrupt bird courting or nesting and breeding of other wildlife on and adjacent to the right-of- 
way. Many of these animals may relocate into similar habitats nearby; however, a lack of adequate 
territorial space could force some animals into suboptimal habitats. This could increase inter- and intra¬ 
specific competition and lower reproductive success and survival. The influx and increased density of 
animals in some undisturbed areas caused by these dislocations could also reduce the reproductive 
success of animals that are not displaced by construction. Additionally, some smaller, less mobile 
wildlife, such as small mammals and burrowing species (e.g., burrowing owl, opossums, shrew, rats, 
mice) and reptiles, could be crushed by construction equipment or trapped in trenches. Bird nests located 
within the construction work area could be destroyed by clearing activities. The loss of these species 
could result in a decrease in the food stock available for predators of these species. These effects, 
however, would cease after construction, and wildlife would return to the newly disturbed areas and 
adjacent, undisturbed habitats after right-of-way restoration is completed. Additionally, the majority of 
impacts on native desert vegetation (about 63 percent) would occur over North Baja’s previously 
disturbed existing pipeline right-of-way. Therefore, the proposed Project would not be expected to 
substantially alter the local wildlife populations. 

The cutting, clearing, and/or removal of existing vegetation would also affect wildlife by 
reducing the amount of available habitat. The degree of impact would depend on the type of habitat 
affected and the rate at which vegetation regenerates after construction. The impact on urban/commercial 
habitats (369.7 acres) would be minor because they provide minimal habitat value and would be restored 
to near original condition following construction. The impact on agricultural habitats (78.4 acres) would 
be relatively minor because these areas receive regular disturbance (e.g., crop planting, harvesting,) and 
would be replanted either immediately following, or during the next growing season following 
construction. 

However, native desert upland habitats could take up to 50 years to become re-established. 
About 943.7 acres of creosote bush scrub, 82.9 acres of desert wash woodland, and about 41.1 acres of 
desert sand dune habitats would be affected by the Project. The effect on these areas would be much 
greater because these native desert habitats would take the longest amount of time to regenerate. The 
impact on dune habitat would be less than on other desert habitats because wildlife has adapted to the 
existing minimal vegetative cover that is common to these areas. In general, the effects on native desert 


4-86 


habitats are not expected to have a significant impact on wildlife populations because the amounts of the 
habitats that would be affected are relatively minor compared to the amounts present in the surrounding 
areas. The majority of the right-of-way through desert habitats (96 percent) would be only temporarily 
expanded and on average and would affect a 25-foot-wide swath of land that is adjacent to the existing 
previously disturbed construction right-of-way used for the A-Line. In addition, approximately 99 
percent of the right-of-way would be adjacent to existing utility or transportation corridors. Furthermore, 
North Baja’s implementation of its CM&R Plan would improve the potential for successful revegetation 
of the right-of-way in the long term (see Section 4.5.3 and Appendix E). Although the loss of native 
desert habitat would be long term, the loss would amount to less than 0.01 percent of the regionally 
available habitat; therefore, the potential for the Project to change the diversity or substantially alter the 
numbers of a local population of any wildlife species, or interfere with the survival, growth, or 
reproduction of affected wildlife, or result in a substantial long-term loss of existing wildlife habitat is 
less than significant. 

Construction of the B-Line would result in a 105-foot-wide cleared right-of-way for a majority of 
its length that could contribute to habitat fragmentation and affect the movement of wildlife species. 
However, this impact would be minimized because North Baja would overlap the majority of its 
construction right-of-way (80 feet) onto the previously cleared right-of-way used to construct the A-Line. 
Because, in general, construction of the B-Line would result in about 25 feet of new disturbance adjacent 
to an existing disturbed right-of-way, the potential for the Project to substantially interfere with the 
movement or range of wildlife species would be less than significant. 

The B-Line and IID Lateral would cross several areas of wetland and numerous open water 
systems (rivers, canals, and drains). The only undisturbed riparian areas that would be crossed are 
adjacent to the Colorado River and would be effectively avoided by the use of the HDD crossing method. 
These areas are important habitats for a number of resident wildlife species although only the Colorado 
River supports fishery resources. Additionally, North Baja plans to implement the HDD crossing method 
at four other waterbody crossings and would avoid in-stream impacts at most other canals and drains by 
crossing at locations where these features are constrained within culverts. These crossing plans would 
minimize impacts on open water habitats. The only open water habitat that would be disturbed would be 
Rannells Drain. Rannells Drain is an agricultural drain that is subject to the clearing of vegetation 
periodically by the PVID. Disturbance to this habitat would be minimized through implementation of 
North Baja’s CM&R Plan (see Appendix E). 

Following construction and restoration, North Baja would monitor the revegetation of the right- 
of-way in areas of desert vegetation through the year 2012. Post-construction monitoring would be 
conducted in all other areas for a period of 2 years following construction. 

Fires inadvertently started by construction activities (e.g., welding), equipment, or personnel 
could also affect wildlife in the Project area by igniting vegetation along the right-of-way. This habitat 
loss could cause crowding in adjacent habitats reducing productivity and increasing stress-induced 
mortality. Fire would likely have temporary impacts on urban/ruderal and agricultural communities and 
longer-term impacts on native desert communities. North Baja has developed a Fire Prevention and 
Suppression Plan to minimize the potential for wildfires (see Appendix N). Some of the measures 
contained in the plan include: requiring the contractor to train all personnel on fire prevention measures, 
restricting smoking and parking to cleared areas, requiring all combustion engines to be equipped with a 
spark arrestor, and requiring vehicles and equipment to maintain a supply of fire suppression equipment 
(e.g., shovels and fire extinguishers). A Fire Guard would be assigned to each construction spread that 
would be responsible for maintaining contact with local fire control agencies. North Baja would restrict 
activities on Federal lands during conditions of high fire danger in coordination with the BLM. 


4-87 


Aboveground Facilities 

At the Ehrenberg Compressor Station, 0.7 acre of urban/ruderal habitat would be temporarily 
disturbed; however, there would be no permanent impacts on habitat. About 4.3 acres of creosote bush 
scrub habitat would be permanently affected by the construction of the Blythe Meter Station. At the 
Ogilby Meter Station, 0.4 acre of the urban/ruderal cover type would be permanently affected by the 
construction of an odorant facility and a pig launcher and receiver. Construction of the El Centro Meter 
Station would occur within an existing industrial facility site and would temporarily affect 2.5 acres of 
urban/ruderal habitat, while 0.2 acre would be affected permanently. 

Valve sites along the B-Line are generally collocated with existing facilities, although four would 
permanently affect 0.3 acre of urban/ruderal habitat and 0.8 acre of creosote bush scrub habitat. The 
installation of three valves along the IID Lateral would affect less than 0.1 acre each of desert sand dune, 
creosote bush scrub, and agricultural habitats. 

Permanent impacts on creosote bush scrub habitat would result from the construction of a pig 
launcher at Rannells Trap (0.3 acre), and the construction of a tap and pig launcher for the IID Lateral 
(0.2 acre). 

The construction, improvement, and modification of access roads would affect a total of 111.2 
acres, primarily creosote bush scrub habitat, although agricultural (8.4 acres), urban/ruderal (1.3 acres) 
and desert sand dune (0.9 acre) habitats would also be affected. About 0.3 acre of creosote bush scrub 
and 0.1 acre of desert sand dune habitat would be permanently affected by the construction of three 
permanent access roads. 

Pipe Storage and Contractor Yards 

The temporary use of four pipe storage and contractor yards would affect 68.1 acres of 
urban/ruderal habitat and 5.0 acres creosote bush scrub habitat. As previously discussed, the 
urban/ruderal community provides minimal habitat values. The area of creosote bush scrub has been 
previously disturbed. No permanent impacts on wildlife would result from the use of these sites. 

4.6.2.3 Migratory Birds 

A variety of migratory bird species, including both songbirds and raptors, utilize the vegetation 
communities identified within the Project area. Migratory birds are species that nest in the United States 
and Canada during the summer, and then migrate south to the tropical regions of Mexico, Central and 
South America, and the Caribbean for the non-breeding season. The North Baja Pipeline Expansion 
Project lies within the Sonoran/Mohave bird conservation region as identified by the U.S. North 
American Bird Conservation Initiative (NABCI) Committee." Of the 61 migratory bird species likely to 
occur within the Project area, 28 species are considered by the FWS to be birds of conservation concern 
including but not limited to: the burrowing owl, Crissal thrasher, Le Conte's thrasher, and Gila 
woodpecker (FWS 2002a). General impacts on migratory birds are discussed below; specific impacts on 
many of these species are discussed in Section 4.7. 

Executive Order 13186 (January 2001) directs Federal agencies to consider the effects of agency 
actions and plans on migratory birds, with emphasis on species of concern. The California Species 
Preservation Act of 1970 (California Fish and Game Code, sections 900 to 903), which is administered by 
the CDFG, prohibits the taking or possessing of any bird egg or nest. Native desert habitats, including 


2 The NABCI Committee is a coalition of government agencies, private organizations, and bird initiatives in the United States working to 
advance integrated bird conservation (NABCI 2006). 


4-88 



desert wash woodland habitat, provide some of the most significant habitat for migratory birds within the 
Project area. The majority of this habitat occurs along the portion of the B-Line that would be 
constructed over a 4- to 6-month period in the latter part of 2009 (see Section 2.4). This proposed 
construction schedule would partially overlap the nesting season (February through September) for a 
majority of the migratory birds in the Project area, which could result in the mortality of eggs and young 
birds that have not yet fledged. 

The North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project would also result in short-term and long-term losses 
of habitat available to migratory birds. Short-term losses of habitat available for use by migratory birds 
would include 86.8 acres of agricultural habitat, and 35.7 acres of wetland/riparian vegetation. Because 
these habitats would quickly recover following construction, they would be available for use by migratory 
birds during the next nesting season following construction. 

Construction of the Project would disturb a total of 1,180.4 acres of desert habitat including 
1,055.2 acres of creosote bush scrub, 83.2 acres of desert wash woodland, and 42.0 acres of desert sand 
dune habitat, which would result in long-term losses of habitat available for use by migratory birds 
because these habitats would require many years to recover following construction. Along the B-Line, 
this loss of habitat would be minimized by North Baja’s proposal to overlap its construction right-of-way 
over the previously disturbed right-of-way reducing new long-term habitat loss by 671.6 acres. 
Additionally, North Baja would reduce the right-of-way width from 105 feet to 80 feet in 16 areas of 
microphyll woodlands, which would reduce impacts on this desert wash woodland habitat by 5.6 acres. 
North Baja would also preserve individual trees within the construction right-of-way where possible. 
Construction along the IID Lateral would not result in a significant loss of habitat as only 142.6 acres of 
native desert habitat would be disturbed of which about 42 acres would occur in the dunes area. Because 
the existing vegetation resources in the dunes area are sparse, the long-term loss of vegetation would have 
a minimal effect on migratory bird habitat in this area. Of the remaining 100.6 acres of desert habitat 
affected by the IID Lateral, 98 percent would occur within or immediately adjacent to existing disturbed 
utility and transportation rights-of-way. The measures contained in North Baja’s CM&R Plan would 
promote revegetation of disturbed areas by restoring original contours, segregating topsoil where grading 
is required, and respreading cut vegetation over the restored areas. 

Although the loss of native desert habitat that would be utilized by migratory birds would be long 
term, 66 percent of the habitat would be previously disturbed, and a majority of the affected habitat would 
occur within or immediately adjacent to existing disturbed utility and transportation rights-of-way. In 
addition, the loss would amount to less than 0.01 percent of the regionally available Sonoran desert 
habitat; therefore, the potential for the Project to substantially interfere with the movement or range of 
migratory birds would be less than significant. 

North Baja would attempt to schedule construction in native habitats outside of the breeding 
season for migratory birds. If, however, construction activities are necessary during the bird breeding 
season, in accordance with its CM&R Plan, North Baja would remove vegetation that could provide 
nesting substrate from the right-of-way before the breeding season, thus eliminating the possibility that 
birds could nest on the right-of-way. Qualified biologists would conduct preconstruction surveys to 
confirm the absence of nesting birds before construction begins. 

If, in spite of vegetation removal, nesting birds are found on the construction right-of-way, the 
nest would not be removed until fledging has occurred or unless authorized after consultation with the 
FWS, the CDFG, and, if the nest is located on Federal lands, the Federal land management agency. 

Although North Baja states that it would preclear vegetation, no details of the preclearing 
proposal have been provided. Therefore, the Agency Staffs recommend that: 


4-89 


• North Baja shall, in consultation with the FWS, the BLM, and the CDFG, develop a 
Preclearing Plan to protect migratory bird species during construction that includes 
specific details of the preclearing methods to be implemented, the specific locations 
where preclearing would occur, and the dates preclearing would be initiated and 
completed for each phase of construction. North Baja shall file the plan and 
documentation of FWS, BLM, and CDFG approval of the plan with the FERC and 
the CSLC for the review and written approval of the Director of OEP and the 
Executive Officer of the CSLC before construction . 

With the implementation of North Baja’s proposed measures and the Agency Staffs’ 
recommendation, the Project would not substantially reduce the abundance of species under the protection 
of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and, therefore, the impact of the Project on migratory bird species would 
be less than significant. 

4.6.2.4 Sensitive or Managed Wildlife Habitats and Species 

The B-Line would cross the Cibola NWR, located about 20 miles south of Blythe along the lower 
Colorado River, between MPs 29.5 to 33.0. The Cibola NWR encompasses about 16,630 acres of land 
bisected by the Colorado River and provides habitat for over 240 species of birds, and numerous 
mammals, including several protected species. The B-Line would cross only a small portion of the NWR, 
on the western edge of the refuge through monotypic tamarisk stands that provide very low quality 
wildlife habitat. 

On BLM lands between MPs 29.2 and 52.0, the B-Line would cross two SMAs in the vicinity of 
the Milpitas Wash. Between MPs 29.2 and 33.8, the area is managed by the BLM Yuma Field Office as 
an SMA under the Yuma District Plan. The Yuma District Plan designates the 4,760-acre area as an 
SMA for its undisturbed desert vegetation, wildlife habitat, and cultural resources (BLM 1985). Between 
MPs 33.8 and 52.0, the area is managed by the BLM El Centro Field Office as a Wildlife Habitat Area 
under the Milpitas Wash Wildlife Habitat Management Plan (BLM 1986). Management objectives for 
this 180,800-acre area include consolidation, protection, and enhancement of wildlife habitat and habitat 
for plants of special management concern; expansion of habitat used by burro deer and other native 
wildlife species; consideration of wildlife species in development and management decisions; and 
obtaining good ecological condition of 70 percent of the area covered by the habitat management plan. 

The Project would cross a Wildlife Habitat Management Area (WHMA) established under the 
NECO Plan. The NECO Plan is an amendment to the BLM’s CDCA Plan and includes most of the 
California portion of the Sonoran Desert ecosystem. The B-Line would cross a WHMA for 14.8 miles 
between approximate MPs 35.2 and 50.0. The WHMA is designated as a multi-species WHMA and 
includes two corridor portions of proposed WHMAs for bighorn sheep between MPs 35.2 and 42.0 and 
MPs 49.0 and 50.0, although no bighorn sheep habitat is included. The management goals for this area 
include the maintenance of naturally occurring distributions of 28 special status animal species and 30 
special status plant species in the planning area; the maintenance of proper functioning condition in all 
natural communities with special emphasis on communities that: (a) are present in small quantity, (b) 
have a high species richness, and (c) support many special status species; and the maintenance of 
ecological processes by maintaining naturally occurring interrelationships among various biotic and 
abiotic elements of the environment (BLM 2002). 

As described in Section 4.7, North Baja proposes a number of conservation measures protecting 
wildlife and special status plants that are generally consistent with objectives of the management plans 
addressing activities in the Milpitas Wash SMA and the multi-species WHMA. Although much of the 
Cibola NWR near the proposed pipeline route is dominated by relatively poor quality habitat (tamarisk 


4-90 



monoculture), overall the refuge is inhabited by a diverse species community. Construction of the North 
Baja Pipeline Expansion Project would not directly affect sensitive wildlife habitat within the refuge. 
Noise associated with construction activities could, however, indirectly impact wildlife by temporarily 
displacing wildlife from areas within the refuge that would be near the construction right-of-way. The 
impact would be greater if construction activities coincide with the breeding season of wildlife that use 
the refuge. Because of the year-round vehicle and boat traffic associated with SR 78 and the Colorado 
River, wildlife in the area is expected to be somewhat acclimated to noise. 

The BLM manages wild horse and burro herds in accordance with the Wild and Free Roaming 
Horses and Burros Act, which was passed by the U.S. Congress in 1971 to protect, manage, and control 
wild horses and burros on the public lands. Through the BLM planning process, the areas where wild 
horses and burros can be managed as a component of the public land have been designated as Herd 
Management Areas (HMAs). In Arizona, the Project would cross a small portion of the Cibola-Trigo 
HMA where there is a slight potential that wild horses and/or burros could be found watering at the 
Colorado River crossing. In California, the B-Line would cross the Chocolate-Mules HMA between 
approximate MPs 34.9 and 75.3 where there is a slight potential for wild burros to occur. Precipitation 
within the Project area would increase the potential for wild horses or burros to occur. Construction of 
the pipeline could affect wild horses or burros if the animals were to fall into the open trench. The BLM 
commented that mitigation measures to prevent animals from being trapped in the open trench, 
specifically measures to be implemented to minimize impact on desert tortoise, would be sufficient to 
minimize impacts on wild horse and burro herds. As discussed in Section 4.7.4.3, North Baja would 
install tortoise escape ramps in the excavated trench at 1-mile intervals. 

The Nature Conservancy, with assistance from others, completed An Ecological Analysis of 
Conservation Priorities in the Sonoran Desert Ecoregion (Ecological Analysis) (Marshall et al. 2000). 
The objective of the Ecological Analysis was to identify landscape-scale conservation sites that, with 
proper management, would help ensure the long-term persistence of the biodiversity in the Sonoran 
Desert. Generally, these conservation sites are areas containing sensitive vegetative communities or rare 
species at a density considered ecologically significant by regional experts. One of the 100 landscape- 
scale conservation sites identified by the Ecological Analysis would be crossed by the B-Line at MP 0.2. 
This 434,141-acre conservation site includes the Colorado River and adjacent riparian areas. The 
Ecological Analysis reports 31 sensitive species or biotic communities associated with the river, including 
18 species with protected status under Federal or State laws. The Colorado River and adjacent riparian 
habitat would be avoided by the HDD crossing of the river. 

The IID Lateral would be adjacent to the East Mesa ACEC and flat-tailed horned lizard 
management area, which was designated to protect wildlife species (especially the flat-tailed horned 
lizard). Evan Hewes Highway, an unmaintained frontage road for the adjacent Interstate 8, is the 
southern border for this ACEC. The IID Lateral would be within the road right-of-way, just outside of the 
management area (Flat-tailed Horned Lizard Interagency Coordinating Committee [FTHLICC] 2003). 
The management area reaches to the road right-of-way just north of MPs 8.5 to 8.8, 9.8 to 14.8, and 15.8 
to 21.0. All construction activities would occur within the road right-of-way for Evan Hewes Highway. 

Impacts on sensitive or managed wildlife habitats and species are not expected to substantially 
affect local wildlife populations or adversely affect biological diversity in the region. 


4-91 


4.6.3 Aquatic Resources 
4.6.3.1 Existing Aquatic Resources 
Pipeline Facilities 

Fishery resources in the waterbodies that would be crossed by the B-Line and BEI Lateral are 
limited to the Colorado River (MP 0.2), the All-American Canal (MP 79.8), and the 30 irrigation canals 
and drains in the PVID near Blythe, California (MPs 0.2 to 11.7). Fishery resources in the waterbodies 
that would be crossed by the IID Lateral are limited to the All-American Canal (MPs 2.4 and 8.1), the 
East Highline Canal (MP 27.5), the Alamo River (MP 32.3), and 36 other irrigation canals and drains. 

The CDFG classifies the Colorado River as a warmwater fishery (CDFG 2000). Representative 
fish species in the Colorado River include bass, bluegill, crappie, catfish, carp, sunfish, and sucker. The 
CDFG has indicated that the fish species found in some reaches of the larger irrigation canals associated 
with the Colorado River are similar to those in the Colorado River (Hayes 2000). However, the irrigation 
canals and the Alamo River do not have a classified fishery. 

In the Project area, the Colorado River flows have been reduced and confined behind a series of 
dams, forming large reservoirs. The normal heavy silt load has been reduced with reservoirs acting as 
settling basins. This change in the flow of the river has led to a deposition of salts, fertilizers, and other 
products of irrigation and agriculture in the sediments of the river and has altered fish fauna composition 
over the last 100 years. 

The B-Line would also cross 265 dry desert washes. Because flow in these washes is minimal 
and limited to the time period following rain events, aquatic ecosystems have not developed in these 
washes. However, as discussed in Section 4.6.2, the washes provide habitat for terrestrial wildlife 
species. 


Potential habitat for the razorback sucker, a Federal- and State-listed endangered fish species, 
occurs in the Colorado River. Details regarding this species are found in Section 4.7.3. No other Federal 
or State-listed special status fish species are known to occur in the surface waters crossed by the proposed 
pipeline routes. 

There is no designated Essential Fish Habitat in the Project area. 

Aboveground Facilities 

There are no surface waters within or immediately adjacent to the boundaries of the aboveground 
facility sites; therefore, no fishery resources would be affected by the construction or operation of the 
aboveground facilities. 

Pipe Storage and Contractor Yards 

There are no surface waters within or immediately adjacent to the proposed pipe storage and 
contractor yards; therefore, no fishery resources would be affected by use of the yards. 

Access Roads 

No surface waters or fishery resources would be affected by use of the access roads. 


4-92 


4.6.3.2 General Impact and Mitigation 

Construction of the pipeline across waterbodies would increase the sedimentation and turbidity of 
the water, the potential for streambank erosion, and the potential for fuel and chemical spills. These 
effects could impact aquatic resources. Construction-related impacts on aquatic resources could also 
result from in-stream blasting, hydrostatic testing, and water withdrawals for dust control. No in-stream 
blasting would be required. The remaining impacts are discussed in more detail below. The degree of 
impact would depend on the proposed crossing method, the existing conditions at each crossing location, 
the mitigation measures employed, and the timing of construction. 

Sedimentation and Turbidity 

Sedimentation can adversely affect fish eggs and juvenile fish survival, benthic community 
diversity and health, and spawning habitat. The B-Line and IID Lateral would cross several flowing 
waterbodies, mostly irrigation canals and ditches in the PVID and the IID that would be crossed by boring 
or installing the pipeline between drain culverts and roads. The Colorado River, All-American Canal, and 
East Highline Canal would be crossed using the HDD method. Only one flowing waterbody, Rannells 
Drain, would be crossed using the open-cut crossing method. 

The open-cut crossing method is a wet trench method and has a higher potential for sedimentation 
and turbidity than the other crossing methods. However, the open-cut method is also the quickest 
crossing method. Because the effects of increased sedimentation and turbidity are generally limited to the 
period of in-stream work, the duration of these effects would be relatively short. Additional discussion on 
the potential impacts associated with the proposed open-cut crossing of Rannells Drain is provided in 
Section 4.6.3.3. 

Streambank Erosion 

Waterbodies crossed by the proposed Project facilities that would be susceptible to streambank 
erosion are primarily limited to perennial rivers and major canals. Crossing these features using the HDD 
method would avoid disturbance of the streambank vegetation. Retaining the existing bank composition 
at these waterbodies would prevent the need for bank armoring following construction. Irrigation canals 
and drains would be crossed at locations where these waterbodies are constrained within culverts, which 
would avoid any bank disturbance. Clearing of vegetation at intermittent waterbodies (dry washes) would 
not be expected to increase the susceptibility of those features to streambank erosion due to the limited 
flow in each waterbody. Further, adherence to North Baja’s CM&R Plan would facilitate revegetation of 
the banks following construction. Therefore, impacts on streambank erosion from the proposed Project 
would be less than significant. 

Fuel and Chemical Spills 

A chemical or fuel spill in or near a waterbody could release contaminants, which could affect 
fish directly or indirectly through changes in food sources or by contaminating the water resources. North 
Baja would adhere to the measures detailed in its CM&R Plan (Appendix E) and the SPCC Plan 
(Appendix F) to prevent a large spill from occurring near surface waters. Hazardous materials storage 
and vehicle or equipment refueling would be restricted within 100 feet of surface waters. Should a spill 
occur, the implementation of the measures in the SPCC Plan, such as maintaining adequate emergency 
response equipment, would decrease the response time for control and cleanup of the spill and minimize 
exposure of aquatic resources to hazardous materials released into a waterbody. Although some 
individual fish or invertebrates could be harmed by a spill of hazardous materials into a waterbody, these 
impacts would not change the numbers of a local population or cause a substantial deterioration of 


4-93 


existing fish habitat. Therefore, the overall impact on aquatic resources from a spill would be less than 
significant. 

Hydrostatic Testing and Dust Control Water Withdrawals 

Potential impacts associated with hydrostatic testing and dust control water withdrawals include 
entrainment of fish, reduced downstream flows, impaired downstream uses associated with water 
withdrawals, erosion, scouring, and a release of chemical additives associated with hydrostatic test water 
discharges. North Baja proposes to obtain test water for the B-Line, BEI Lateral, and piping within the 
Ehrenberg Compressor Station and Blythe Meter Station from either: (1) an existing irrigation canal that 
withdraws water from the Colorado River just south of North Baja’s Ehrenberg Compressor Station 
property, (2) from a well on the Ehrenberg Compressor Station site, or (3) from the All-American Canal. 
Groundwater associated with the well is hydrologically connected to the Colorado River. The IID Lateral 
would be tested in sections with water obtained directly from the All-American Canal. These same 
sources of water are expected to be used for dust control. North Baja would screen intake piping to 
prevent fish and fish egg entrainment during hydrostatic test water withdrawal. In Section 4.3.3.4, the 
Agency Staffs have recommended that North Baja file a revised Dust Control Plan that specifies the 
sources of water that would be used for dust control, the anticipated quantities of water that would be 
required, and measures to minimize fish and fish egg entrainment during dust control water withdrawals. 
Because water withdrawals would occur from an existing well or irrigation canals and would not affect 
current flow levels in the Colorado River or other waterbodies containing fishery resources, and fish and 
fish egg entrainment would be minimized during water withdrawals, the effects of the proposed Project 
on the movement, range, or spawning of resident fish would be less than significant. 

After hydrostatic testing, the water would be discharged into irrigation canals at or immediately 
adjacent to the Ehrenberg Compressor Station site or returned to the All-American Canal. No chemicals 
would be added to the test water, and energy dissipation devices would be employed to minimize channel 
erosion. Dust control water would be sprayed directly on the ground surface. Therefore, changes in 
water quality would not be expected from hydrostatic testing or dust control activities. Implementation of 
these measures would reduce impacts on fishery resources to less than significant levels. 

Timing of Construction 

The degree of impact associated with in-stream activities can be affected by the season of 
construction. Construction during periods of sensitive fish activities (i.e., spawning and migration) can 
have a greater impact on fish than construction during other periods. Because in-stream activities would 
only occur at Rannells Drain, which does not support fisheries resources, there would be no impact on 
fish spawning and migration from construction of the proposed Project. 

4.6.3.3 Site-specific Impact and Mitigation 

The proposed open-cut trenching through Rannells Drain would create a temporary increase in 
sediment load in the drain. The PVID cleared and dredged the drain in 2002 before the construction of 
the A-Line, but the drain has subsequently revegetated with tamarisk, Arundo sp., and native vegetation, 
and has limited free water. The PVID has indicated it would be willing to perform maintenance 
clearing/dredging at the Rannells Drain crossing before construction of the B-Line in 2009, as long as it is 
done between August 2 and March 14 as agreed with the CDFG. 

Rannells Drain is connected to the Colorado River through the Palo Verde Lagoon and a series of 
other drainage structures, but is generally unsuitable as fish habitat because of its shallow depth and 
stagnant conditions. As such, Rannells Drain does not have a classified fishery and no fisheries habitat 


4-94 


would be lost as a result of construction across Rannells Drain. Nonetheless, North Baja proposes to use 
sediment booms downstream of the trenching, which would contain sedimentation to the localized area. 
Any sediment potentially released during construction would be removed the next time the PVID dredges 
the drain for agricultural purposes (expected to occur 1 year after construction) and would not be a 
permanent addition to the aquatic environment. 

North Baja proposes to cross the Colorado River, the All-American Canal, and the East Highline 
Canal using the HDD method. Although the HDD method avoids in-stream impacts because it eliminates 
the need for in-stream excavation, it does not completely eliminate the possibility of impacts on aquatic 
resources due to the possibility of a frac-out into the waterbody (see Section 4.3.3.3). Drilling mud 
primarily consists of water mixed with bentonite, which is a naturally occurring clay material. A frac-out 
could occur if the drilling head hits a subterranean fracture in the substrate. When the drilling mud 
reaches the fracture, it can follow the fracture up or otherwise be forced to the surface or into the water if 
drilling is occurring under a waterbody. If drilling mud is released into the water, the settling bentonite 
could cover fish or amphibian eggs and cut off their oxygen supply. Bentonite has not been shown to 
adversely affect gills or feeding of fish or invertebrates. 

During construction of the A-Line, there were no inadvertent releases of drilling mud into the 
Colorado River or the All-American Canal, and none is expected during construction of the B-Line and 
IID Lateral. However, North Baja has prepared an HDD Plan (see Appendix G) that requires North Baja 
to continuously monitor the drilling operations. If monitoring indicates an in-stream release, the Els 
would immediately notify North Baja’s construction management personnel. North Baja would notify the 
appropriate Federal and State agencies as soon as possible of an in-stream release event, detailing the 
nature of the release and corrective actions being taken. The notified agencies would determine whether 
additional measures need to be implemented. If it is determined that the release cannot be remedied 
without causing additional environmental impact, North Baja would request agency approval to continue 
the drilling operations. If a release occurs that may migrate downstream and affect water quality, 
downstream water users would be contacted by North Baja. The contacts and telephone numbers of 
downstream users would be assembled before commencement of construction, and maintained on site. 
Implementation of these measures would minimize adverse impacts of a frac-out in or near these waters 
on the aquatic communities to less than significant levels. Minimizing the effects of a frac-out in 
accordance with North Baja’s HDD Plan would also prevent the substantial deterioration of existing fish 
habitat. 

4.6.4 Arrowhead Alternative 

Construction of the Arrowhead Alternative would affect 7.2 acres of urban/ruderal habitat and 
16.1 acres of agricultural habitat. About 74 percent of these impacts would be temporary and short term. 
Any wildlife in these areas would be adapted to the regular disturbances that occur within these habitats. 
Because these habitats would quickly recover following construction, they would be available for use by 
migratory birds during the next nesting season following construction. No sensitive or managed wildlife 
habitats and species would be affected. The three canals that would be crossed by the Arrowhead 
Extension do not support fisheries resources. 

4.6.5 No Project Alternative 

Under the No Project Alternative, the FERC would deny North Baja’s application for a 
Certificate and a Presidential Permit amendment, the CSLC would deny North Baja’s application for an 
amendment to its right-of-way lease across California’s Sovereign and School Lands, and the BLM would 
deny North Baja’s application to amend its existing Right-of-Way Grant and obtain a Temporary Use 
Permit for the portion of the Project on Federal lands. The No Project Alternative means that the Project 


4-95 


would not go forward and the Project-related facilities would not be installed. Accordingly, none of the 
potential environmental impacts identified for the construction and operation of the proposed Project 
would occur. 

Because the proposed Project is privately funded, it is unknown whether North Baja would fund 
another energy project in California. However, should the No Project Alternative be selected, the energy 
needs identified in Section 1.1 would likely be addressed through other means, such as through other 
LNG or natural gas-related pipeline projects. Such projects may result in potential environmental impacts 
of the nature and magnitude of the proposed Project as well as impacts particular to their respective 
configurations and operations; however, these impacts cannot be predicted with any certainty at this time. 


4-96 


4.7 


SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES 


4.7.1 Significance Criteria 

An adverse impact on federally or State-listed or other special status species would be considered 
significant and would require mitigation if Project construction or operation would: 

• reduce the abundance of sensitive species that occur within the Project area; 

• result in the loss or alteration of designated or proposed critical habitat for one or more 
listed species; 

• cause a temporary loss or alteration of habitat important for one or more listed species 
that could cause increased mortality or lowered reproductive success of the species (i.e., 
avoidance for greater than one breeding season); 

• result in direct or indirect impacts on candidate or sensitive species populations, or 
habitat, that would contribute to or result in the Federal or State listing of the species 
(e.g., by substantially reducing species numbers or by resulting in the permanent loss of 
habitat essential for the continued existence of a species); or 

• create a potential health hazard or involve the use, production, or disposal of materials 
that pose a hazard to special status species populations in the Project area. 

4.7.2 Regulatory Requirements and Species Identification 

Federal agencies are required by section 7 of the ESA (Title 19 USC Part 1536[c]), as amended 
(1978, 1979, and 1982), to ensure that any actions authorized, funded, or carried out by the agency do not 
jeopardize the continued existence of a federally listed endangered or threatened species, or result in the 
destruction or adverse modification of designated critical habitat of a federally listed species. The action 
agency (e.g., the FERC) is required to consult with the FWS and/or the U.S. Department of Commerce, 
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service (NOAA Fisheries) 
to determine whether federally listed endangered or threatened species or designated critical habitat are 
found in the vicinity of the proposed Project, and to determine the proposed action’s potential effects on 
those species or critical habitats. For actions involving major construction activities with the potential to 
affect listed species or designated critical habitat, the Federal agency must submit its Biological 
Assessment (BA) to the FWS and/or NOAA Fisheries and, if it is determined that the action may 
adversely affect a listed species, the Federal agency must submit a request for formal consultation to 
comply with section 7 of the ESA. In response, the FWS and/or the NOAA Fisheries would issue a 
Biological Opinion (BO) as to whether or not the Federal action would likely jeopardize the continued 
existence of a listed species, or result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated critical 
habitat. 


In compliance with section 7 of the ESA, the FERC has requested that the FWS consider this 
draft EIS/EIR, along with various survey reports prepared by North Baja, as the BA for the North Baja 
Pipeline Expansion Project. No species under NOAA Fisheries’ jurisdiction would be affected by the 
proposed Project. 

Under the CEQA, the CSLC must take into account the impacts on special status species. 
Additionally, California has its own Endangered Species Act (CESA) that requires State agencies to 
protect and promote the recovery of State-listed endangered or threatened species. Similar to the ESA, 


4-97 


the CESA requires that State lead agencies consult with the CDFG to ensure that actions are not likely to 
jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered or threatened species or result in the destruction or 
adverse modification of essential habitat. In addition to species listed as threatened or endangered under 
the ESA and CESA, agencies and organizations such as the FWS, the BLM, the CDFG, and the 
California Native Plant Society (CNPS) maintain lists of special concern, sensitive, or rare species that 
are also appropriate to consider in this NEPA and CEQA analysis. 

For purposes of this environmental analysis, special status plants and animals include the 
following: 

• species officially listed by California or the Federal government as endangered, 
threatened, or rare; 

• species that are proposed for Federal listing as threatened or endangered or considered 
candidates for listing; 

• species noted as sensitive or of special concern by the FWS, the BLM, the Arizona Game 
and Fish Department (AGFD), or the CDFG; and 

• plants occurring on Lists 1A, IB, 2, 3, and 4 of the CNPS’ Inventory of Rare and 
Endangered Vascular Plants of California (Skinner and Pavlik 1994). 

North Baja participated in extensive coordination efforts with the FWS, the BLM, the CDFG, and 
the AGFD before and during construction of the A-Line. Those efforts were summarized in the final 
Biological Report for that project and submitted to the agencies in 2002 (North Baja 2002). Building on 
that information base, and using data from the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB), AGFD 
Heritage Data Management System, and through discussions with plant and wildlife specialists with 
knowledge of the Project area, North Baja prepared a list of threatened, endangered, and special status 
species that potentially occur in the vicinity of the proposed Project. In addition to those 
communications, meetings were held with representatives of the FWS, the BLM, and the CDFG to 
present an overview of the Project and solicit issues of concern from the agencies. 

A total of 51 special status species were identified as potentially occurring within the Project area 
(see Table 4.7.2-1). Following focused habitat evaluations and species-specific surveys in 2005, 24 of the 
51 species were eliminated from consideration due to lack of habitat, lack of potential impact, or both (see 
Table 4.7.2-1). The remaining 27 species are discussed below. 

4.7.3 General Impact and Mitigation 

In general, the impacts of the Project on special status species would be the same as described for 
vegetation, wildlife, and aquatic resources. However, the magnitude and duration of these impacts could 
be greater for special status species because their distribution and relative abundance usually are more 
limited. Construction could remove special status plants living within the construction right-of-way and 
could disturb, displace, or harm special status animals on and adjacent to construction work areas. 
Construction could also affect special status plants and wildlife by temporarily altering the habitat along 
the pipeline right-of-way and permanently altering the habitat at aboveground facility sites. 


4-98 


TABLE 4.7.2-1 


Special Status Species Initially Identified as Potentially Occurring in the Vicinity 
of the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 

Status a Facility/General Milepost 

Eliminated from Further Range Where Species May 

Species Federal State Other Consideration Occur 

Mammals 


American badger (Taxidea 


SC 


Yes. Suitable habitat not 


taxus) 




present in Project area. 


Arizona myotis ( Myotis 


SC 


Yes. Occasional transient 


occultus) 




only in Project area. 


Big free-tailed bat 


SC 


Yes. Occasional transient 


(Nyctinomops macrotis) 




only in Project area. 


California leaf-nosed bat 


SC 

BLM-S 

Yes. Occasional transient 


(Macrotus califomicus) 




only in Project area. 


Cave myotis (Myotis velifei) 


SC 

BLM-S 

Yes. Suitable habitat not 
present in Project area. 


Colorado River cotton rat 
(Sigmodon arizonae plenus) 


SC 


No 

B-Line: MP 0.2 

Desert bighorn sheep (Ovis 
canadensis nelsoni) 



BLM-S 

No 

B-Line: MP31.0 

Pale big-eared bat 


SC 


Yes. Occasional transient 


(Corynorhinus townsendii 
pallescens) 




only in Project area. 


Pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus) 


SC 

BLM-S 

Yes. Occasional transient 
only in Project area. 


Pallid San Diego pocket 


SC 


Yes. Limited range of 


mouse ( Chaetodipus fallax 




species does not include 


pallidus) 




Project area. 


Western mastiff bat ( Eumops 


SC 

BLM-S 

Yes. Occasional transient 


perotis califomicus) 




only in Project area. 


Yuma mountain lion ( Puma 


SC 


Yes. Suitable habitat not 


concolor browni) 




present in Project area. 


Birds 






Arizona Bell’s vireo (Vireo 


SE 


No 

B-Line: MPs 0.0 to 3.0 and 

bellii arizonae) 

Bald eagle ( Haliaeetus 

FT 

SE 


Yes. No suitable 

31.0 to 33.0 

leucocephalus) 




nesting/roosting sites in 
Project area. Occasional 
transient only. 



Brown-crested flycatcher 
(Myiarchus tyrannulus) 


SC 


No 

B-Line: MPs 22.0 to 23.0, 
35.0 to 36.0, 41.0 to 46.0, 
50.0 to 53.0, and 59.0 to 
66.0 


Brown pelican (Pelecanus 

FT 

SE 


Yes. Suitable habitat not 


occidentalis) 




present in Project area. 


Burrowing owl (Athene 


SC 

BLM-S 

No 

B-Line: MPs 0.0 to 12.0 

cunicularia) 





IID Lateral: MPs 28.0 to 

46.0 

California black rail (Laterallus 


ST 


No 

B-Line: MPs 0.0 to 12.0 and 

jamaicensis coturniculus) 





31.0 to 33.0 






IID Lateral: MP 33.0 

Crissal thrasher (Toxostoma 


SC 


No 

B-Line: MPs 0.0 to 3.0, 24.0 

crissale) 

Elf owl (Micrathene whitneyi) 


SE 


Yes. Suitable habitat not 
present in Project area. 

to 29.0, and 31.0 to 33.0 


4-99 





TABLE 4.7.2-1 (cont’d) 


Special Status Species Initially Identified as Potentially Occurring in the Vicinity 
of the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 



Status a 



Facility/General Milepost 

Species 

Federal 

State 

Other 

Eliminated from Further 
Consideration 

Range Where Species May 
Occur 

Ferruginous hawk (Buteo 
regalis) 


SC 


No 

Occasional migrant in the 
Project area 

Gila woodpecker ( Melanerpes 
uropygialis) 


SE 


No 

B-Line: MPs 0.2, 17.6,21.8, 
22.2 to 25.3, 35.6 to 36.4, 

46.4, 50.2 to 52.4, 55.5, 

59.5, and 64.8 to 65.2 

Le Conte’s thrasher 
(Toxostoma lecontei) 


SC 

BLM-S 

No 

B-Line: MPs 12.0 to 79.8 

IID Lateral: MPs 8.0 to 28.0 

Sonoran yellow warbler 
(Dendroica petechia 
sonorana ) 


SC 


Yes. Occasional transient 
only in Project area. 


Southwestern willow 
flycatcher ( Empidonax trailii 
extimus) 

FE 

SE 


No 

B-Line: MPs 0.0, 25.0, and 
33.0 

Summer tanager (Piranga 
rubra) 


SC 


No 

B-Line: MPs 22.0 to 23.0, 

35.0 to 36.0, 41.0 to 46.0, 

50.0 to 53.0, and 59.0 to 

66.0 

Vermilion flycatcher 
(Pyrocephalus rubinus ) 


SC 


No 

B-Line: MPs 0.0 to 12.0, 

22.0 to 29.0, 31.0 to 33.0, 

35.0 to 53.0, 59.0 to 66.0, 
and 79.0 to 79.8 

Western yellow-billed cuckoo 
( Coccyzus americanus 
occidentals) 

FC 

SE 


No 

B-Line: MP 0.2 

Yellow breasted chat ( Icteria 
virens) 


SC 


No 

B-Line: MPs 0.0 to 3.0, 22.0 
to 23.0, and 31.0 to 33.0 

Yuma clapper rail ( Raiius 
longirostris yumanensis) 

FE 

ST 


No 

B-Line: MPs 0.0 to 12.0 and 
31.0 to 33.0 






IID Lateral: MP32.3 

Amphibians/Reptiles 






Colorado River toad ( Bufo 
alvarius) 


SC 


No 

B-Line: MP 0.2 

Couch's spadefoot toad 
(Scaphiopus couchii) 


SC 


No 

B-Line: MPs 25.0 and 35.3 

Desert tortoise ( Gopherus 
agassizii) 

FT 

ST 


No 

B-Line: MPs 17.0 to 75.2 

Flat-tailed horned lizard 
(Phrynosoma meal Hi) 


SC 

BLM-S 

No 

B-Line: MPs 71.0 to 79.8 

IID Lateral: MPs 8.0 to 28.0 

Fish 






Bonytail chub ( Gila elegans) 

FE 

SR 


Yes. Not expected to 
occur in Project area. 


Desert pupfish ( Cyprinodon 
macularius) 

FE 

SE 


Yes. Not expected to 
occur in Project area. 


Razorback sucker ( Xyrauchen 
texanus) 

FE 

SE 


No 

B-Line: MPs 0.2 and 24.0 to 
31.0 

Plants 






Algodones Dune sunflower 
(Helianthus niveus tephrodes) 


SE 

IB 

No 

IID Lateral: MPs 0.5 to 7.9 

Crucifixion thorn ( Castela 
emoryi) 



2 

Yes. Not expected to 
occur in Project area. Not 
identified during previous 
surveys. 



4-100 





TABLE 4.7.2-1 (cont’d) 


Special Status Species Initially Identified as Potentially Occurring in the Vicinity 


of the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 


Status a 


Eliminated from Further 

Facility/General Milepost 




Range Where Species May 

Species 

Federal State 

Other 

Consideration 

Occur 

Fairyduster (Calliandra 


2 

No 

B-Line: MPs 45.1 to 49.8, 

eriophylla) 




53.6 to 57.4, and 65.1 to 

66.6 





IID Lateral: MPs 0.5 to 7.9 

Giant Spanish-needle 


1B/BLM- 

No 

IID Lateral: MPs 0.5 to 7.9 

(Palafoxia arida var. 
gigantean) 


S 



Glandular ditaxis ( Ditaxis 


2 

Yes. Not expected to 


clariana) 



occur in Project area. Not 
identified during previous 
surveys. 


Harwoods milk-vetch 


2 

Yes. Not expected to 


(Astragalus insularis var. 



occur in Project area. Not 


harwoodii) 



identified during previous 
surveys. 


Las Animas colubrina 


2 

Yes. Not expected to 


(Colubrina califomica) 



occur in Project area. Not 
identified during previous 
surveys. 


Munz's cholla ( Opuntia 


1B/BLM- 

Yes. Not expected to 


munzii) 


S 

occur in Project area. Not 
identified during previous 





surveys. 


Peirson’s milk-vetch 

FT SE 

IB 

No 

B-Line: MPs 72.0 to 79.8 

(Astragalus magdalenae var. 
peirsonii) 




IID Lateral: MPs 0.5 to 7.5 

Saguaro ( Carnegiea 
gigantean) 


2 

Yes. Not expected to 
occur in Project area. Not 
identified during previous 
surveys. 



Sand food (Pholisma sonorae) 


IB 

No 

IID Lateral: MPs 0.5 to 7.9 

Slender woolly-heads 


2 

Yes. Not expected to 


(Nemacaulis denudata var. 



occur in Project area. Not 


gracilis) 



identified during previous 
surveys. 


Wiggins’s cholla (Opuntia 
wigginsii) 


3 

Yes. Not expected to 
occur in Project area. Not 
identified during previous 
surveys. 



Wiggins’s croton (Croton 

SR 

2 

No 

IID Lateral: MPs 0.5 to 7.9 


wigginsii) 


Status: 

FE = Federally listed as endangered 
FT = Federally listed as threatened 

FC = Candidate for Federal listing as endangered or threatened 
SE = California State-listed as endangered 
ST = California State-listed as threatened 

SR = California State-listed as rare (California Native Plant Protection Act) 

SC = Federally/California State-listed as special concern 

1B = CNPS list of plants that are rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere 

2 = CNPS list of plants that are rare, threatened, or endangered in California, but more common elsewhere 

3 = CNPS list of plants about which more information is needed to determine their status 
BLM-S = Bureau of Land Management lists as sensitive 


4-101 






North Baja has proposed to implement the following general minimization and conservation 
measures to reduce the impact of the Project on special status species: 

• North Baja would use its environmental training program, successfully implemented for 
the A-Line construction, as a basis for a site-specific environmental training program to 
be implemented before the start of work. All employees and contractors working in the 
field would be required to complete an environmental training session before beginning 
work on the right-of-way. The program would include discussions of the biology, 
distribution, and ecology of special status species within the geographic area of 
construction; protection afforded such species under applicable Federal and State laws 
and regulations; all protection measures that must be followed to protect such species 
during Project activities; penalties for noncompliance; reporting requirements; and the 
importance of compliance with all protection measures. To ensure proper focus, 
emphasis would be placed on the specific aspects of compliance applicable to the 
particular audience’s activities on the Project. 

• Employees and contractors would be informed during one or more training sessions that 
they are not authorized to handle or otherwise move listed species at any time, including 
while commuting to work sites or at a work site. 

• North Baja would hire and designate at least two Els per construction spread who would 
be responsible for overseeing Project environmental protection measures, including those 
for special status species. Environmental inspection procedures would be in compliance 
with the relevant provisions of North Baja’s CM&R Plan. North Baja would also hire 
and designate at least one authorized biologist who would be responsible for 
identification of habitat and individuals of special status species and for implementation 
of all measures requiring an authorized biologist’s intervention. The biologist would, if 
needed, hold the required permits or formal agreements with appropriate Federal and 
State agencies for the survey or handling of any special status species. 

• An authorized biologist would conduct species-specific surveys of each Project facility 
located within areas identified during North Baja’s surveys as listed species habitat no 
more than 7 days before the onset of activities. 

• Project personnel would exercise caution when commuting to the construction area to 
minimize any chance for the inadvertent injury or mortality of species encountered on 
roads leading to and from the construction area. North Baja’s contractors and employees 
would report all such incidents directly to an El. 

• Only existing routes of travel and approved access roads would be used to and from 
construction areas. Cross-country travel by vehicles and equipment would be prohibited. 
Except on county- or State-maintained roads, vehicle and equipment speeds would not 
exceed 25 miles per hour within potential habitat of a listed species. On the B-Line, 
between MPs 48.0 and 68.0 (an area of relatively high tortoise density). North Baja states 
that it would limit vehicle and equipment speeds to 10 miles per hour except for stringing 
trucks, which North Baja proposes to allow to travel at 25 miles per hour. 

• Authorized biologists would monitor all work where prior North Baja surveys have 
documented the occurrence of one or more listed species and where construction 
activities can reasonably be expected to adversely affect those species. In conjunction 
with North Baja’s Els, the biologists would have the authority to halt all non-emergency 


4-102 


actions that might result in harm to a listed species, and would assist in the overall 
implementation of protection measures for listed species during Project activities. 

All trash and food items generated by construction and maintenance activities would be 
promptly placed in a closed container and regularly removed from the Project site to 
reduce the attractiveness of the area to common ravens and other desert predators. 

Firearms and domestic pets would be prohibited from work sites. 

In the construction work area and along access roads, employees and contractors would 
look under vehicles and equipment for the presence of special status species before 
movement. If a special status species is observed, no vehicles or equipment would be 
moved until the animal has left voluntarily or is removed by an authorized biologist. 

Pipeline construction activities between dusk and dawn would be limited to emergencies 
only (i.e., issues involving human health and safety) with the exception of the HDD 
operations (including those at the Colorado River, the All-American Canal, Interstate 8, 
the East Highline Canal) and the open-cut crossing of Rannells Drain. 

Open pipeline trenches, auger holes, or other excavations that could entrap wildlife would 
be inspected by an authorized biologist a minimum of three times per day, and 
immediately before backfilling. In habitats supporting special status species, pipe 
segments would either be capped or taped closed each night or raised on supports of 
sufficient height to prevent the entry and entrapment of special status species. Such pipe 
segments would be inspected regularly before sealing and before using in the morning. 
For open trenches, earthen escape ramps would be maintained at 1-mile intervals. Other 
excavations that remain open overnight would be covered, ramped, or fenced to prevent 
entrapment of wildlife. 

If a listed species is located during construction, and a contingency for avoidance, 
removal, or transplant has not been approved by the FWS or appropriate agency. North 
Baja would not proceed with Project activities in that location until specific consultation 
with the FERC, the FWS, the BLM, and/or other appropriate agency is completed. 

All encounters with listed species would be reported to the biologist, who would record 
the following information: 

• species; 

• location (narrative and maps) and dates of observations; 

• general condition and health, including injuries and state of healing; 

• diagnostic markings, including identification numbers or markers; and 

• locations moved from and to. 

Upon locating a dead or injured listed species, North Baja would notify the FWS and the 
CDFG in California or the AGFD in Arizona. Written notification would be made within 
15 days of the date and time of the finding or incident (if known) and would include: 
location of the carcass, a photograph, cause of death (if known), and other pertinent 
information. 


• As described in Section 2.2.1, in general, the construction right-of-way would be limited 
to a width of 105 feet along the B-Line and 60 feet along the BEI Lateral, while the 
construction right-of-way for the IID Lateral would be limited to a width of 60 feet for 
the majority of its length and 80 feet where it parallels existing utility corridors. The 
construction right-of-way would be clearly staked and flagged in advance of construction. 
The construction area includes approved work areas for the pipelines, compressor station, 
and meter stations; the facilities at Rannells Trap; access roads; the tap to the B-line and 
pig launcher associated with the IID Lateral; and staging and pipe storage areas. 

• As described in Section 4.6.2.3, North Baja would attempt to schedule construction in 
native habitats outside of the breeding season for migratory birds. If, however, 
construction activities are necessary during the bird breeding season. North Baja would 
remove vegetation that could provide nesting substrate from the right-of-way before the 
breeding season, thus eliminating the possibility that birds could nest on the right-of-way. 
In accordance with the Agency Staffs’ recommendation in Section 4.6.2.3, specific plans 
relating to preclearing of vegetation would be coordinated with the FWS, the BLM, and 
the CDFG. Qualified biologists would conduct preconstruction surveys to confirm the 
absence of nesting birds before construction begins. 

• If, in spite of vegetation removal, nesting birds are found on the construction right-of- 
way, the nest would not be removed until fledging has occurred or unless authorized after 
consultation with the FWS, the CDFG, and, if the nest is located on Federal lands, the 
Federal land management agency. 

• At specified locations in areas of high-density microphyll woodland (see Table 4.5-3), 
North Baja would narrow the construction right-of-way width to 80 feet. Areas of this 
narrower construction width would be identified in the field, staked, and flagged in 
advance of construction. 

• At the conclusion of work, all trenches and holes would be completely filled, surfaces 
cleaned and smoothed, and each site recontoured to match the original profiles as closely 
as possible. 

• With the exception of fenced facilities, all materials and equipment would be removed 
from the area upon completion of work. All stakes, flagging, and fencing used to 
delineate and protect any environmental or cultural feature in the construction area would 
be removed no later than 30 days after construction and restoration are complete. 

• Upon completion of Project activities, North Baja would submit a final report to the 
FERC for distribution to other agencies, including the FWS. The report would document 
the effectiveness and practicality of the conservation measures, the number of individuals 
of each species excavated from their burrows or removed from the site, the number of 
individuals killed or injured, and other pertinent information. The report would also 
recommend modifications of the Project stipulations in order to enhance the protection of 
species in the future. In addition, the final report would provide the actual acreage 
disturbed by Project activities by habitat type. 

These measures would be applied Project-wide and would reduce most impacts on special status 
species to less than significant levels. The Agency Staffs believe, however, that North Baja’s proposal to 
allow stringing trucks to travel at 25 miles per hour between MPs 48.0 and 68.0 on the B-Line would not 
adequately protect special status species. North Baja has indicated that limiting vehicles, other than 


4-104 


stringing trucks, to 10 miles per hour would provide maximum protection to special status species due to 
the increased frequency of non-stringing truck traffic along the right-of-way. North Baja further indicated 
that stringing trucks would enter and exit the right-of-way at locations that minimized the time the trucks 
were operating along the right-of-way, and that decreasing the allowed speed of the stringing trucks could 
have schedule and associated cost implications. However, the Agency Staffs continue to have concerns 
about allowing these large, generally heavily loaded, trucks to operate at an increased speed along the 
right-of-way in areas of known special status species occurrence given the longer required stop time for 
these vehicles. Because the speed restriction would only occur along a 20-mile stretch and the restriction 
would be known well before the construction bids would be prepared, it does not appear that this 
restriction should significantly impact the construction schedule or costs. Furthermore, limiting the speed 
of the stringing trucks would aid in dust control, which is a concern of the BLM. Therefore, the Agency 
Staffs recommend that: 

• North Baja shall restrict stringing trucks to a 10-mile-per-hour speed limit between 
MPs 48.0 and 68.0 on the B-Line. 

As discussed in Section 2.5, North Baja would employ Els who would be responsible for 
overseeing the implementation of environmental protection measures; full-time third-party Compliance 
Monitors would be present on the construction spreads to monitor compliance with the Project mitigation 
measures and requirements; and the FERC, CSLC, and BLM staff would conduct periodic inspections of 
the Project for compliance with the Project’s environmental conditions. Other Federal, State, and local 
agencies would conduct oversight of inspection and monitoring to the extent determined necessary by the 
individual agency. 

Site-specific impacts and species-specific conservation measures are discussed below. 

4.7.4 Federally Listed Threatened and Endangered Species 

Based on consultations with the Arizona and Carlsbad Field Offices of the FWS as well as the 
CDFG and a search of the CNDDB, nine federally listed endangered or threatened species or species 
proposed for listing as endangered or threatened were identified as potentially occurring in the Project 
area (see Table 4.7.2-1). Following preliminary field surveys and further consultations with the FWS 
offices, four species were eliminated from further consideration: the bald eagle, brown pelican, bonytail 
chub, and desert pupfish. These species are only known from sites well away from the proposed Project 
area. Therefore, the Agency Staffs have determined that there would be no effect on these species from 
construction or operation of the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project. The Agency Staffs have 
determined that the proposed Project has the potential to affect the remaining five federally listed species 
that are known or suspected to occur within the Project area. A discussion of these five species is 
presented below. 

4.7.4.1 Southwestern Willow Flycatcher 

The southwestern willow flycatcher is federally and California-listed as endangered. This species 
breeds in riparian habitats along rivers, streams, or other wetlands where dense growths of willows or 
other shrubs and medium-sized trees are present. Similar habitats are used during migration. All willow 
flycatcher subspecies winter in Mexico, Central America, and possibly northern South America, but 
specific wintering grounds and migration routes for the southwestern subspecies are unknown. 
Southwestern willow flycatchers are late migrants and typically arrive on their breeding grounds in mid- 
May where they remain until late-August (Tibbitts et al. 1994). 


4-105 


Surveys for southwestern willow flycatchers were conducted in accordance with FWS survey 
protocols during May, June, and July 2005 in known areas of habitat along the B-Line as identified during 
surveys for the A-Line. These areas include the Ehrenberg area (MP 0.0), the Stallard Road area (MP 
25.0), and near the Cibola NWR Davis Lake Area (MP 33.0). No breeding southwestern willow 
flycatchers were identified at any of the habitat locations surveyed along the B-Line in 2005. However, 
migrants were identified between May 17 and June 12, 2005 at Ehrenberg and between May 16 and June 
11, 2005 at Stallard Road. No southwestern willow flycatchers were identified at the Cibola NWR, or 
during a June 29, 2005 survey or two July 2005 surveys. These results are consistent with the 2001 
surveys and the 2002 monitoring efforts conducted at the same locations for the A-Line. There is no 
suitable habitat for this species along the proposed BEI or IID Laterals. 

Southwestern willow flycatchers are known to migrate through the area that would be crossed by 
the B-Line, specifically near the Colorado River and in the vicinity of Stallard Road, but there is no 
evidence of these birds nesting in the area. Although the removal of desert wash woodland trees during 
the installation of the B-Line would reduce habitat for this species, in accordance with its general 
conservation measures, North Baja proposes to clear vegetation outside of the breeding season, thereby 
avoiding impacts on potential breeding individuals. Also, because the habitat loss would occur adjacent 
to an existing pipeline in the area, clearing would not fragment suitable habitat, but rather would be a 
minor, incremental loss of desert wash woodland. Nonetheless, if suitable habitat was occupied during 
clearing, construction could increase stress on migrating flycatchers and increase their susceptibility to 
predators or reduce their physical condition during the critical migrating period. These potential impacts, 
however, would not ultimately be expected to occur as there is sufficient desert wash woodland 
throughout the Project vicinity along the Colorado River and in the Cibola NWR. It is expected that 
migrating individuals would use these adjacent areas for foraging and cover. Thus, there would be no 
direct adverse impacts from Project construction on individual birds or bird populations aside from a 
temporary relocation from one area of suitable habitat to another similar and nearby area. North Baja’s 
implementation of measures included in its CM&R Plan would facilitate the long-term restoration and 
revegetation of desert wash woodlands affected by construction such that these areas would be suitable 
for use by migrating flycatchers in the future. 

Southwestern willow flycatchers potentially using habitat along the Colorado River, although not 
likely to be directly affected by construction, could be disturbed by activities associated with the HDD of 
that waterbody. Specifically, noise and light associated with HDD equipment and activities could 
dissuade individuals from using habitat in the vicinity of the HDD and/or could interrupt resting 
individuals if construction activities occurred at night. During construction of the A-Line, the FWS 
required North Baja to implement specific measures for construction activities near the Colorado River. 
Consistent with those measures, and in order to minimize the potential for construction activities to affect 
southwestern willow flycatchers at the Colorado River crossing, the Agency Staffs recommend that: 

• North Baja shall implement the following measures at the Colorado River during 
activities associated with the HDD: 

a. all individuals working within or adjacent to southwestern willow flycatcher 
habitat would be required to complete southwestern willow flycatcher 
training prior to working within the construction right-of-way in those 
areas ; 

b. if night-time operations are required for the pullback of the pipe through 
the drilled hole under the river, all work shall be conducted behind 
abatement walls that control noise and light emissions. Abatement walls are 


4-106 




to be installed before construction , regardless of the time of start of 
construction; 

c. no night lighting shall be used within 1,000 feet of potential habitat adjacent 
to the river during the breeding season that could be visible at the edge of 
the habitat; 

d. construction-related pedestrian access is to be restricted in riparian habitat 
during the breeding season except in the case of emergency frac-out 
response and to monitor the location of the drill head; and 

e. dust is to be strictly controlled by watering construction areas within 1,000 
feet of potential habitat at the Colorado River. 

As a result of North Baja’s proposed measures as well as the Agency Staffs’ recommendation 
above and in Section 4.6.2.3, although the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project may affect habitat used 
by migrating southwestern willow flycatchers, the Project is not likely to adversely affect the species. 
Further, although construction-related disturbances could cause individuals to avoid suitable habitats, 
with implementation of the measures outlined above, the Agency Staffs believe that disturbances of 
individuals are unlikely and impacts on the southwestern willow flycatcher associated with the Project 
would be less than significant. 

4.7.4.2 Yuma Clapper Rail 

The Yuma clapper rail is federally listed as endangered and California-listed as threatened. In 
California, the Yuma clapper rail is found between February and August in freshwater and brackish 
emergent wetlands along the Colorado River and around the Salton Sea. Although this species requires 
mature stands of cattails and bulrushes for cover, it can be found foraging in adjacent areas of shallow 
water and mudflats for crayfish, clams, and insects. 

Preliminary evaluations along the B-Line indicated that potential habitat for this species is found 
in freshwater marshes, wetlands, and drains near the Colorado River, the Palo Verde Valley, and the 
Davis Lake areas (MPs 0.0 to 12.0 and MPs 31.0 to 33.0). A focused survey was conducted at each 
location of identified potential habitat in 2001 and again in May 2005. The survey was conducted to 
determine the number and location, if any, of the Yuma clapper rail. Surveys were conducted following a 
modified survey protocol (survey window extended to May 30, 2005), as discussed with and approved by 
the FWS on May 10, 2005. Each area of potential habitat was surveyed twice between May 16 and May 
25, 2005. No Yuma clapper rails were detected during these survey efforts, consistent with survey and 
monitoring results from 2001 and 2002 and species records in the area. No potential habitat for the Yuma 
clapper rail was identified along the proposed BEI Lateral. 

Preliminary evaluations along the IID Lateral indicated that potential habitat for this species may 
occur near the Alamo River (MP 32.3). North Baja has not yet conducted surveys for this species at this 
river crossing. 

Although this species was not identified along other areas of the B-Line during previous surveys, 
in order to avoid impacts on the species during construction of the A-Line, the FWS required that 
vegetation be cleared before construction in the areas of direct impacts along Rannells Drain as well as an 
area extending 150 feet on either side of the direct zone of impact. Further, the CDFG has recommended 
that if Rannells Drain is not cleared before construction, North Baja would be required to conduct surveys 
for the Yuma clapper rail at this location. North Baja has agreed to conduct these surveys, if necessary. 


4-107 



However, North Baja has not proposed conservation measures to avoid impacts on individual Yuma 
clapper rails if identified during such surveys, nor has North Baja proposed to conduct surveys for the 
Yuma clapper rail at the Alamo River. Therefore, the Agency Staffs recommend that: 

• North Baja shall implement the following measures to minimize impact on the 
Yuma clapper rail unless North Baja provides documentation from the FWS and 
the CDFG that such measures are not necessary or if site-specific surveys fail to 
identify individuals at the Alamo River or Rannells Drain: 

a. ensure vegetation at the proposed crossing location of Rannells Drain, 
extending 150 feet on either side of the proposed construction work area, is 
cleared before February 1, 2009 : 

b. ensure vegetation at the proposed crossing location of the Alamo River is 
cleared before February 1, 2009 : and 

c. conduct all activities at Rannells Drain and the Alamo River between the 
hours of 8:30 AM and 3:30 PM to avoid periods of peak Yuma clapper rail 
vocalizations. 

Direct impacts on Yuma clapper rail and/or rail habitat along the Colorado River would be 
avoided through North Baja’s proposed HDD crossing of this waterbody and the adjacent habitat. 
Additionally, the measures recommended by the Agency Staffs to avoid impacts on the southwestern 
willow flycatcher at the Colorado River would also avoid impacts on the Yuma clapper rail at the 
Colorado River. 

Disturbance of wetlands and drains during Project construction would reduce available foraging 
and nesting habitat for the species. The reduction in this habitat type could reduce the ability of the area 
to support clapper rails or affect the overall suitability of habitat in the region. However, impacts on 
wetland and drain habitat would be temporary because these vegetation communities typically revegetate 
within 1 year following construction. As a result of the Agency Staffs’ recommendations and given that 
impacts on Yuma clapper rail habitat would be minor and temporary, the proposed Project is not likely to 
adversely affect the species. 

4.7.43 Desert Tortoise 

The desert tortoise, a federally and California-listed threatened species, is widely distributed 
throughout the Mojave and Colorado deserts from below sea level to elevations of about 4,130 feet or 
higher. It is most common in desert scrub, desert wash, and Joshua tree habitats, but occurs in almost 
every desert habitat except on the most precipitous slopes. Highest tortoise densities are found in 
creosote bush communities with extensive annual wildflower blooms. This species requires friable soil 
for burrow and nest construction, but does not occupy areas of blown sand or very sandy soils due to 
burrow collapse. 

The BLM’s CDCA Plan, completed in 1980, has been amended by the NECO Plan. The NECO 
planning area is in the southeastern CDCA, primarily in the Sonoran Desert, and provides a landscape 
approach to managing desert ecosystems. The CDCA includes a system of large DWMAs for the desert 
tortoise. Specific DWMA prescriptions include standardization of BLM management classes, tortoise 
categories, and critical habitat; 5:1 ratio for surface disturbance compensation; and an overall 1 percent 
disturbance limit for any development within a DWMA. 


4-108 






The North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project, including the B-Line, the BEI Lateral, and the IID 
Lateral, would be outside the designated DWMAs. All of the land defined in BLM records as tortoise 
habitat that would be crossed by the proposed pipeline and lateral routes was previously defined as 
Category II lands, which recognize that the desert tortoise habitat is of lesser quality than that classified as 
Category I lands (most of which were incorporated into a DWMA). All categories of desert tortoise 
habitat outside the DWMAs were defined under the NECO Plan to be Category III for the purposes of 
compensation for disturbance, and have been assigned a compensation ratio of 1:1. 

In the vicinity of the proposed B-Line, the creosote bush scrub habitats east of the Mule 
Mountains extending south to Interstate 8 (MPs 16.0 to 75.2) are potentially suitable habitat for the desert 
tortoise. A portion of this, MPs 34.0 to 58.4, is part of the Chuckwalla Unit, an area designated by the 
FWS as critical habitat for the desert tortoise. The Chuckwalla Unit includes privately owned land as 
well as land managed by the BLM. 

Surveys for desert tortoise were conducted along the A-Line in 2001 and for the proposed B-Line 
between April 18 and April 27, 2005. The purpose of the surveys was to determine the number and 
location of desert tortoise sign, including live and dead tortoise, burrows, scat, and tracks. Although one 
potential tortoise burrow was found in Riverside County at MP 11.8 in 2001, tortoise sign reliably 
associated with active tortoise use was noted only along the proposed B-Line route from MPs 17.0 to 
69.0. In general, tortoise sign found in the 2001 survey, tortoise encounters documented during 
construction in 2002, and tortoise sign found in 2005 were closely correlated. The highest density of 
tortoise sign was found between MPs 41.0 and 67.0, with very high concentrations in the area of Indian 
Wash between MPs 62.5 and 65.5. 

Construction of the B-Line would impact a total of 832 acres of desert tortoise habitat; however, 
only 237 acres would be new disturbance and 595 acres would overlap the previously disturbed (and 
compensated for) A-Line construction right-of-way. A total of 358 acres of critical habitat would be 
impacted, of which 106 acres would be new disturbance. The FWS has stated that only new disturbance 
would require compensation (Robleck 2005). The primary impact on critical habitat would occur during 
the construction phase of the Project. During construction, critical habitat would be temporarily disturbed 
at work areas, temporary access roads, and along the construction right-of-way. Although these areas 
would be restored and not used again during routine operation or maintenance, recovery in the arid 
climate is expected to take more than 10 years. Through desert tortoise critical habitat, the B-Line would 
be immediately adjacent to the existing A-Line, as well as portions of Stallard Road, SR 78, and Ogilby 
Road, which would minimize habitat fragmentation. The proposed Project would use existing access 
roads to the extent practicable with new access road construction limited to 0.25 mile as permanent access 
to the Blythe Meter Station. Thus, while the area of the right-of-way is within critical habitat. North Baja 
would limit disturbance of previously unaffected areas to the narrowest extent practicable. The proposed 
Project would not cross public lands within the DWMA that are managed for the conservation of the 
desert tortoise. 

To compensate for the loss of desert tortoise habitat not previously compensated for during 
construction of the A-Line, North Baja would implement the following measures: 

• Compensation rates for new impacts on desert tortoise habitat of 1:1 would be calculated 
and an assessed financial contribution would be paid to the BLM. In accordance with 
accepted guidelines previously implemented by the FERC, the FWS, and the BLM, areas 
of new impacts would include only those areas not previously affected by construction of 
the A-Line. 


4-109 


• North Baja would provide funding to the CDFG to manage acquired lands in addition to 
an enhancement fee based on the same compensation rate, which would be based on the 
CDFG published or calculated rates per acre at the time of issuance of the final EIS/EIR 
for the proposed Project. 

In addition to the loss of potential desert tortoise habitat, construction-related impacts on the 
desert tortoise could include direct mortality or injury as a result of being crushed by vehicles, movement 
of soils, and entrapment in burrows and open trenches. North Baja would minimize the potential for 
impacts on the desert tortoise by implementing the following measures: 

• North Baja would submit the names, permit numbers, and relevant tortoise experience 
resumes of all individuals who might need to handle desert tortoises to the FWS for 
approval at least 15 days before the initiation of clearance surveys. North Baja would 
also submit the list to the BLM for its records. Project activities would not begin until an 
authorized biologist has been approved. Although other biologists may be employed as 
biological monitors, only those approved by the FWS as authorized biologists would be 
permitted to handle tortoises. 

• All persons authorized by the FWS to handle desert tortoises would follow the guidelines 
established in the Guidelines for Handling Desert Tortoises During Construction 
Projects (Desert Tortoise Council 1999). 

• A clearance survey for the desert tortoise would be conducted by an authorized biologist 
within 24 hours before ground disturbance. 

• Burrows outside of the limits of the construction right-of-way would be flagged so that 
the biological monitor would be able to more easily locate them during construction. 

• All desert tortoise burrows or pallets in the construction area would be excavated by an 
authorized biologist. All desert tortoise handling and burrow excavation would be in 
accordance with the handling procedures developed by the FWS and would be conducted 
by authorized biologists. 

• Desert tortoises that are found above ground and need to be moved from potential harm 
would be placed in the shade of a shrub by the authorized biologist. All desert tortoises 
removed from burrows would be placed in an unoccupied burrow of approximately the 
same size as the one from which it was removed. 

• If an existing burrow is unavailable, the authorized biologist would construct or direct the 
construction of a burrow of similar size, shape, depth, and orientation as the original 
burrow. Desert tortoises moved during inactive periods would be monitored for at least 2 
days after placement in the new burrows to ensure their safety. The authorized biologist 
would be allowed some judgment and discretion to ensure that the survival of the desert 
tortoise is likely. 

• Should a tortoise wander into the construction area during construction, adjacent 
activities would be halted until the tortoise is moved out of the construction work area 
and out of harm’s way. 

• North Baja would install exclusion fencing along the right-of-way in areas where tortoise 
density is sufficiently high to warrant fencing, in the opinion of the authorized biologist 


4-110 


in charge of tortoise surveys and in consultation with the FWS and the CDFG, to prevent 
tortoises from entering the construction work area and getting in harm’s way. 

• A worker bonus program would be implemented that would reward construction staff 
who spot a tortoise within the construction work area and, without touching or disturbing 
the animal, notify the authorized biologist for action. 

• If a tortoise is located in the construction work area and is not moving, adjacent activities 
would be halted until an authorized biologist is able to move it out of harm’s way. 

• All pipeline marker signs within desert tortoise habitat would be fitted with “bird-be- 
gone” or similar bird repellent devices. 

• Only approved access roads would be used. Only approved areas would be used for 
temporary storage areas, laydown sites, and any other surface-disturbing activities. Any 
routes of travel that require construction or modification, or any additional work areas, 
would be surveyed for tortoises by an authorized biologist(s) before modification or 
construction of the route or construction or use of a new work area. 

• Trench segments or other excavations would be provided with tortoise escape ramps at 1- 
mile intervals. All excavations would be inspected for tortoises three times daily and 
before backfilling. 

• Any time a vehicle is parked, the ground around and under the vehicle would be 
inspected for desert tortoises before the vehicle is moved. If a desert tortoise is observed, 
it would be left to move on its own. If this does not occur within 15 minutes, an 
authorized biologist would remove and relocate the tortoise. 

• Within desert tortoise habitat, construction pipe, culverts, or similar structures with a 
diameter of 3 inches or greater that are stored on the construction site for one or more 
nights would be inspected for tortoises before the material is moved, buried, or capped. 
As an alternative, all such structures may be capped before being stored on the 
construction site. 

• All construction-related activities in desert tortoise habitat would be conducted between 
dawn and dusk. 

Although these measures would substantially reduce impacts on the desert tortoise, the 
construction of the proposed Project is likely to adversely affect the desert tortoise and its critical habitat 
and, as such, impacts on this species would be considered significant. Therefore, approval of the Project 
would be subject to a Statement of Overriding Considerations under the CEQA. In addition, as part of the 
section 7 formal consultation process, the FWS is expected to issue non-discretionary terms and 
conditions in order to ensure that the Project would not jeopardize the continued existence of the desert 
tortoise. North Baja would not be authorized to make any irreversible or irretrievable commitments of 
resources that would foreclose formulation or implementation of any reasonable or prudent alternatives 
needed to avoid jeopardizing the continued existence of the species and adverse modification of its 
critical habitat. 


4-111 


4.7.4.4 Razorback Sucker 


The razorback sucker is a federally and California-listed endangered fish species found only in 
large rivers of western North America’s Colorado River basin (Mueller 2000). Both a riverine and 
lacustrine species, razorback suckers are found in low-velocity main channel backwaters or off-channel 
wetlands. This fish spawns in areas of sand, gravel, or rocks in shallow water. 

The razorback sucker may occur along the proposed B-Line at the Colorado River crossing (MP 
0.2). The razorback sucker is also known to occur throughout the Palo Verde Outfall Drain. The 
proposed B-Line route would parallel, but would not affect, the Palo Verde Outfall Drain from MPs 24.0 
to 31.0. 


The FWS has designated a portion of the Colorado River crossed by the B-Line as critical habitat 
for the species. As currently proposed, North Baja would install the pipeline under the Colorado River 
using the HDD method. Unlike a conventional open-cut crossing, an HDD crossing would not alter or 
remove streambed or streambank habitat, cause in-stream sedimentation, or interfere with fish movement. 
This method would avoid effects on the razorback sucker during the crossing of the Colorado River. 

North Baja may withdraw water from sources hydrologically connected to the Colorado River for 
use in dust control activities and hydrostatic testing of the pipeline (see Section 43.3.4). Pursuant with its 
CM&R Plan, North Baja would screen intake piping to prevent fish and fish egg entrainment during 
hydrostatic test water withdrawals. In Section 4.33.4, the Agency Staffs have recommended that North 
Baja file a revised Dust Control Plan that includes measures to prevent fish and fish egg entrainment 
during dust control water withdrawal. 

It is possible that geologic irregularities could be encountered during the HDD crossing of the 
Colorado River that could result in the inadvertent release of drilling mud (frac-out) or the inability to 
complete the crossing using the HDD method. North Baja has prepared an HDD Plan (see Appendix G) 
that would minimize the adverse impact of a frac-out on aquatic resources. During construction of the A- 
Line, there were no frac-outs into the Colorado River and, based on geotechnical studies, none are 
expected to occur during the B-Line crossing of the river. Therefore, although the potential exists for the 
Project to affect the species in the event of a frac-out during the HDD crossing of the Colorado River, the 
potential for this to occur is low. Because of the low likelihood of a frac-out and the measures that would 
be implemented during water withdrawals from the Colorado River, the Agency Staffs have determined 
that construction of the proposed Project is not likely to adversely affect the razorback sucker or its critical 
habitat and, as such, impacts on this species would be less than significant. 

4.7.4.5 Peirson’s Milk-vetch 

The Peirson’s milk-vetch is a federally listed threatened and California-listed endangered plant 
found in southern California, Arizona, and Baja California. In California, the Peirson’s milk-vetch occurs 
on sand dunes in the Algodones Dunes system of Imperial County. Historically, the plant was known 
from Borrego Valley in San Diego County and at a site southwest of the Salton Sea in Imperial County, 
but it has not been identified at those locations in recent years (Sawyer and Keeler-Wolf 1995). It is 
thought that the species responds positively to substrate disturbance, due in part to the redistribution of 
sandy substrate and nutrients to the ground surface. 

Critical habitat for the Peirson’s milk-vetch was designated by the FWS in 2004. Critical habitat 
in the Project area consists of Subunits A and B of the Algodones Dunes Critical Habitat Unit, which 
includes both Federal and private land. Subunit A is north of SR 78 and encompasses portions of the 
Mammoth and North Algodones Dunes Wilderness. Subunit B lies south of SR 78 and north of Interstate 


4-112 


8 and encompasses the Ogilby Management Area. The proposed Project does not cross Subunits A or B 
and, therefore, would be outside designated critical habitat. 

North Baja conducted a focused survey for the portion of the proposed B-Line route south of the 
intersection with Interstate 8 (MPs 72.0 to 79.8) on May 14, 2005, and a supplemental survey on the west 
side of the right-of-way on September 4, 2005. Individuals and small populations of the Peirson’s milk- 
vetch were found along the proposed B-Line route in areas of sandy substrate off the existing A-Line 
right-of-way, while the three larger populations (greater than 100 plants each) were found on the A-Line 
right-of-way. Plant populations varied in density, generally occurring as single plants or relatively 
isolated populations of several dozen plants. The survey extended up to 30 feet west of the existing right- 
of-way, but only one plant was seen west of the previously disturbed right-of-way, approximately 5 feet 
off of the existing right-of-way. The remainder of the plants occurred within the disturbed right-of-way. 

North Baja did not conduct a focused survey for the Peirson’s milk-vetch along the proposed IID 
Lateral. However, the BLM conducted an annual focused survey for the Peirson’s milk-vetch in 2005 in 
the ISDRA, which included the area that would be crossed by the IID Lateral. The results of this survey 
showed populations of the Peirson’s milk-vetch close to the proposed IID Lateral route between MPs 0.5 
and 7.5. Therefore, the presence of the Peirson’s milk-vetch is assumed between MPs 0.5 and 7.5 of the 
IID Lateral. 

Although no Peirson’s milk-vetch were identified during preconstruction monitoring for the A- 
Line, after the heavy rains of 2004 and 2005 large numbers of Peirson’s milk-vetch were found in the 
disturbed post-construction right-of-way. Based on the survey results of the proposed B-Line and 
existing A-Line rights-of-way, it appears that there is a substantial seed bank of Peirson’s milk-vetch 
available that was not adversely affected by construction of the A-Line. Additionally, it appears as if the 
topsoil and seed bank conservation measures implemented during construction of the A-Line in 2002 
successfully preserved and distributed Peirson’s milk-vetch seeds and provided for the quick re¬ 
establishment of this species. North Baja would utilize the same techniques used during construction and 
restoration of the A-Line for the proposed B-Line, including topsoil segregation to conserve the existing 
seed bank, respreading of topsoil upon completion of construction, and imprinting the right-of-way during 
restoration with equipment (e.g., sheepsfoot roller) to provide micro-catchment areas for seed retention. 
Clearing could result in the loss of the current season’s seed production depending on construction 
timing; however, Peirson’s milk-vetch seed is able to remain viable for several years (FWS 2002b). 
Therefore, re-establishment would not be dependent upon construction occurring after a single season’s 
seed-production period. 

North Baja would similarly segregate topsoil along the IID Lateral, but would not use a 
sheepsfoot roller in the area of the dunes along the lateral because this equipment is ineffective in sand. 
Construction of the IID Lateral through potential Peirson’s milk-vetch habitat would be conducted in the 
summer months after adult plants (if present) have already set seed, which should allow for the re¬ 
establishment in the next growing season after construction is completed. 

Proposed mitigation measures, including topsoil segregation and timing of construction, would 
substantially reduce impacts on the Peirson’s milk-vetch. Additionally, construction through previously 
undisturbed areas adjacent to the existing right-of-way could actually benefit the species by providing 
open areas for the species to develop. Nonetheless, the proposed Project would result in direct impacts on 
the species, including crushing and cutting of individuals and populations. Thus, although construction in 
locations adjacent to populations of this species may increase habitat suitability or otherwise make the 
area suitable for proliferation of the species, the likelihood of overall positive benefits is uncertain. The 
clearing and grading of areas currently containing individuals and populations of this species would result 
in direct and adverse impacts on existing populations. Therefore, the Agency Staffs believe that the North 


4-113 


Baja Pipeline Expansion Project is likely to adversely affect the Peirson’s milk-vetch and, as such, 
impacts on this species would be considered significant and approval of the Project would be subject to a 
Statement of Overriding Considerations under the CEQA. In addition, as part of the section 7 formal 
consultation process, the FWS is expected to issue non-discretionary terms and conditions in order to 
ensure that the Project would not jeopardize the continued existence of the Peirson’s milk-vetch. North 
Baja would not be authorized to make any irreversible or irretrievable commitments of resources that 
would foreclose formulation or implementation of any reasonable or prudent alternatives needed to avoid 
jeopardizing the continued existence of the species and adverse modification of its critical habitat. 

4.7.5 State-listed Threatened and Endangered Species 

Based on consultations with the AGFD and the CDFG and a search of the CNDDB, 16 State- 
listed or proposed listed rare, threatened, or endangered species were identified as potentially occurring 
within the proposed Project area. The Agency Staffs have determined that due to lack of habitat, the 
proposed Project would not affect the bald eagle, the brown pelican, the elf owl, or the desert pupfish, and 
they have been eliminated from further consideration. Based on habitat evaluations and species-specific 
surveys, the Agency Staffs have determined that the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project has the 
potential to affect the remaining 11 species. Five of these species are also federally listed (southwestern 
willow flycatcher, Yuma clapper rail, desert tortoise, razorback sucker, Peirson’s milk-vetch) and are 
discussed in Section 4.7.4. The remaining six species are discussed below. 

4.7.5.1 Arizona Bell’s Vireo 

The Arizona bell’s vireo is a California-listed endangered bird that inhabits desert riparian 
communities where thickets of willow and other low shrubs are found along water and intermittent 
streams. In California, the Arizona bell’s vireo is limited in distribution to a few locations along the 
Colorado River. 

Habitat evaluation surveys along the proposed B-Line identified potential habitat for this species 
at the Colorado River (MPs 0.0 to 3.0) and the Davis Lake area (MPs 31.0 to 33.0). As discussed 
previously, the use of the HDD method to cross the Colorado River and implementation of North Baja’s 
general conservation measures would serve to avoid or minimize potential impact on areas adjacent to the 
Colorado River, including habitat for the Arizona bell’s vireo. The proposed B-Line would cross no 
closer than 1,300 feet to Davis Lake between MPs 31.0 and 33.0 and, therefore, would not be considered 
a noise impact. In addition, riparian habitat would not be affected at this location. Therefore, 
construction of the pipeline would have no adverse effect on the Arizona Bell’s vireo or its habitat. As 
such, the Agency Staffs do not expect impacts to reduce the overall abundance of the species in the area 
or cause a temporary loss or alteration of important habitat for the species. As a result, impacts on this 
species would be less than significant. 

4.7.5.2 California Black Rail 

The California black rail is a California-listed threatened species. This freshwater marsh bird 
requires mature stands of cattails and bulrushes for cover, and it can be found foraging in adjacent areas 
of shallow water and mudflats for crayfish, clams, and insects. 

Preliminary habitat evaluations indicate that potential habitat for the California black rail is found 
in freshwater marshes, wetlands, and drains along the B-Line route near the Colorado River (MPs 0.0 to 
3.0), the Palo Verde Valley (MPs 0.0 to 12.0), and the Davis Lake area (MPs 31.0 to 33.0). Habitat for 
this species may also occur near the Alamo River (MP 32.3) along the IID Lateral. 


4-114 


North Baja conducted a focused survey at each location of potential rail habitat along the A-Line 
in 2001 and along the proposed B-Line in May 2005. No California black rails were detected at any of 
the survey locations. 

Because this species was not identified during surveys along the B-Line, no special mitigation 
measures are proposed besides North Baja’s general conservation measures. However, areas of suitable 
habitat could become occupied prior to construction beginning in 2009, if the Project is approved. As 
recommended by the CDFG, North Baja has agreed to conduct preconstruction surveys for the California 
black rail if habitat for this species is not cleared before construction. Habitat for this species is similar to 
the Yuma clapper rail, previously discussed in Section 4.7.4.2. Per the Agency Staffs’ recommendation 
for the Yuma clapper rail (see Section 4.7.4.2), suitable habitat for both the Yuma clapper rail and the 
California black rail at both Rannells Drain and the Alamo River would be cleared before construction. 
This measure would avoid direct impacts on the California black rail during construction of the B-Line. 

Disturbance of wetlands and drains during Project construction would reduce available foraging 
and nesting habitat for the species. Impacts on wetland and drain habitat would be temporary because 
these vegetation communities typically revegetate within 1 year following construction. Given that no 
individuals were found to be using the areas along the proposed Project corridor during several recent 
surveys and that impacts on California black rail habitat would be minor and temporary, construction of 
the proposed Project would have no adverse effect on the California black rail and impacts on this species 
would be less than significant. 

4.7.5.3 Gila Woodpecker 

The Gila woodpecker is a California-listed endangered species. This species is common in 
Arizona, but is limited to a few scattered locations in the Colorado River Valley in California. The Gila 
woodpecker inhabits areas of desert riparian, mesquite, saguaro, or Joshua tree woodlands. It may 
sometimes be found in trees, palms, and even wooden utility poles in urban and suburban areas. 

Before construction of the A-Line, 10 areas were identified as potential Gila woodpecker nesting 
habitat. These areas include the Colorado River crossing (MP 0.2) and areas at MPs 17.6, 21.8, 22.2 to 

25.3 (Stallard Road Wash), MPs 35.6 to 36.4 (Milpitas Wash), MPs 46.4, 50.2 to 52.4, 55.5, 59.5, and 
64.8 to 65.2 (Gold Rock Ranch). A focused survey and preconstruction surveys were conducted before 
construction of the A-Line in 2002. 

The 2002 surveys identified two occupied cavities at MPs 50.7 and 51.7. One active nest cavity 
was identified in a power pole approximately 54 feet from the right-of-way. The other active nest cavity 
was located in a Palo Verde tree with a single male woodpecker within 16 feet of the right-of-way. The 
birds persisted during and after construction, and appeared unaffected by the pipeline installation process 
(Foster Wheeler Environmental Corporation [FWENC] 2002). 

The CDFG has recommended that North Baja conduct preconstruction surveys to determine the 
presence of the Gila woodpecker in the vicinity of the proposed B-Line in areas of suitable nesting 
habitat. North Baja indicated that it would assume that Gila woodpeckers are present in areas of suitable 
nesting habitat and thus, no surveys are required. North Baja further indicated that since individuals 
nearby during construction of the A-Line were not affected by construction activities, no mitigation 
measures would be necessary. Construction of the B-Line is anticipated to occur outside of the nesting 
season for the Gila woodpecker. Nonetheless, in accordance with the CDFG’s recommendation, the 
Agency Staffs recommend that: 


4-115 


• North Baja shall conduct surveys for Gila woodpeckers in areas of suitable nesting 
habitat before initiation of construction of the B-Line . If active Gila woodpecker 
nest cavities are identified during preconstruction surveys, North Baja shall monitor 
cavities during construction to determine if nesting individuals are being disturbed 
by construction activities. If disturbance (e.g., avoidance of cavity by individuals) is 
noted and young are present in the cavity, North Baja shall cease construction in the 
area until young have fledged from the nest cavity. 

With implementation of the recommended surveys and mitigation measures, if necessary, no 
direct adverse effect on the Gila woodpecker is expected from construction of the proposed B-Line. As a 
result, impacts on this species would be less than significant. 

4.7.5.4 Western Yellow-billed Cuckoo 

The western yellow-billed cuckoo is a California-listed endangered species and is also a 
candidate for Federal listing as endangered or threatened. This bird is an uncommon to rare summer 
resident of valley foothill and desert riparian habitats in scattered locations in California. Habitat loss has 
resulted in drastically reduced numbers of this species. Western yellow-billed cuckoos are most 
frequently found along perennial streams, wetlands, and other riparian areas with large stands of 
cottonwood and willow trees and an understory of mesquite, tamarisk, and cattail marshes. 

Marginal habitat for the western yellow-billed cuckoo is present along some areas of the 
Colorado River near MP 0.2 of the proposed B-Line. North Baja’s biologists conducted protocol surveys 
for this species before construction of the A-Line in June and July 2001. No individuals were identified 
during these surveys (FWENC 2002). Due to the highly degraded nature of the habitat in the Colorado 
River vicinity of the Project, this species is not expected to occur. Additionally, the Agency Staffs have 
determined that through implementation of North Baja’s general conservation measures, the proposed 
Project would have no adverse effect on the western yellow-billed cuckoo. As such, the Agency Staffs do 
not expect any Project-related impacts to reduce the overall abundance of the species in the area or cause 
a temporary loss or alteration of important habitat for the species. As a result, impacts on the western 
yellow-billed cuckoo would be less than significant. 

4.7.5.5 Algodones Dune Sunflower 

The Algodones Dune sunflower is a Federal species of concern, a California-listed endangered 
species, and is designated IB (rare throughout all or portions of its range) by the CNPS. The Algodones 
Dune sunflower is a perennial herb found in partially stabilized desert dunes in the lee of prevailing winds 
in the southern Sonoran Desert in Imperial County and in southwestern Arizona and New Mexico. The 
species blooms from September to May, and is threatened primarily by OHV traffic (Skinner and Pavlik 
1994, CDFG 2000). 

Suitable habitat for this species is found along the IID Lateral route in the southern Algodones 
Dunes within the ISDRA (MPs 0.5 to 7.9). The IID Lateral would cross approximately 76 acres of 
Algodones Dune sunflower habitat in the ISDRA. In lieu of conducting species-specific surveys, North 
Baja has indicated that it is assuming that the species is present throughout the area of suitable habitat. 
North Baja would segregate topsoil along the IID Lateral, but would not use a sheepsfoot roller in the area 
of the dunes along the lateral because this equipment is ineffective in sand. Construction of the IID 
Lateral through potential Algodones Dune sunflower habitat would be conducted in the summer months 
after adult plants (if present) have already set seed, which should allow for the re-establishment in the 
next growing season after construction is completed. Although North Baja’s general conservation 
measures would substantially reduce impact on this species, construction of the IID Lateral may result in 


4-116 



the removal of individual plants. However, the reproduction potential of the local population would not 
be affected; therefore, construction of the IID Lateral would not have an adverse impact on the population 
of Algodones Dune sunflower. As a result, with the implementation of North Baja’s general conservation 
measures, including the efforts to minimize the spread of non-native species, the Agency Staffs do not 
expect impacts to reduce the overall abundance of the species in the area or cause a temporary loss or 
alteration of important habitat for the species. Therefore, impacts on the Algodones Dune sunflower 
would be less than significant. 

4.7.5.6 Wiggins’s Croton 

The Wiggins’s croton is a California-listed rare plant species and is designated 2 (rare throughout 
all or portions of its range in California, but common beyond the boundaries of California) by the CNPS. 
This species occurs in the southeastern Sonoran Desert in southeastern Imperial County in California. It 
can be found on desert dunes and Sonoran desert scrub habitats, and is commonly associated with sand 
dunes and sandy arroyos. The Wiggins’s croton blooms from March to May and is threatened by OHV 
traffic (Skinner and Pavlik 1994, CDFG 2000). 

Suitable habitat for the Wiggins’s croton is found along the IID Lateral route in the southern 
Algodones Dunes within the ISDRA (MPs 0.5 to 7.9). The IID Lateral would cross approximately 76 
acres of Wiggins’s croton habitat in the ISDRA. In lieu of conducting species-specific surveys, North 
Baja has indicated that it is assuming that the species is present throughout the area of suitable habitat. 
North Baja would segregate topsoil along the IID Lateral, but would not use a sheepsfoot roller in the area 
of the dunes along the lateral because this equipment is ineffective in sand. Construction of the IID 
Lateral through potential Wiggins’s croton habitat would be conducted in the summer months after adult 
plants (if present) have already set seed, which should allow for the re-establishment in the next growing 
season after construction is completed. Although North Baja’s general conservation measures would 
substantially reduce impact on this species, construction of the IID Lateral may result in the removal of 
individual plants. However, the reproduction potential of the local population would not be affected; 
therefore, construction of the IID Lateral would not have an adverse impact on the population of 
Wiggins’s croton. As a result, with the implementation of North Baja’s general conservation measures, 
including the efforts to minimize the spread of non-native species, the Agency Staffs do not expect 
impacts to reduce the overall abundance of the species in the area or cause a temporary loss or alteration 
of important habitat for the species. Therefore, impacts on the Wiggins’s croton would be less than 
significant. 

4.7.6 Other Special Status Species 

Based on consultations with the FWS, the BLM, the AGFD, and the CDFG and a search of the 
CNDDB, 35 special status species (i.e., those not federally or State-listed or proposed listed endangered 
or threatened) were identified as potentially occurring within the Project area. Based on habitat 
evaluations and species-specific surveys, the proposed Project has the potential to affect 16 of these 
species. A discussion of potential impacts and measures to avoid or minimize impacts on these species is 
presented below. 

4.7.6.1 Colorado River Cotton Rat 

The Colorado River cotton rat is a California species of special concern. This species is limited 
to the marshes of the Colorado River. The B-Line would cross the Colorado River and associated riparian 
areas at about MP 0.2 using the HDD method. This method would not require surface disturbance within 
the river or in the adjacent banks or wetlands. If a frac-out occurred during the HDD of the river, drilling 
mud could be released into areas adjacent to the river, and North Baja’s efforts to contain the drilling mud 


4-117 


could further affect potential habitat for the Colorado River cotton rat. However, successful HDDs of the 
Colorado River have been completed in the vicinity of the B-Line crossing and North Baja does not 
anticipate difficulties with the crossing for the proposed Project. The Agency Staffs anticipate that the 
proposed HDD is likely to be successful; therefore, the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project is not 
expected to reduce the overall abundance of the species in the area, cause a temporary loss or alteration of 
important habitat for the species, or result in other direct or indirect impacts on the Colorado River cotton 
rat that could contribute to a trend towards Federal or State listing. As a result, impacts on the Colorado 
River cotton rat would be less than significant. 

4.7.6.2 Desert Bighorn Sheep 

The desert bighorn sheep is listed as a sensitive species by the BLM. Desert bighorn sheep 
usually occur in small herds of about 10 animals in open, rocky, steep areas with available water and 
herbaceous forage. The sheep generally have two distinct, separate ranges in summer and winter, with 
corresponding spring and fall migrations. The summer ranges for desert bighorn sheep are typically 
smaller than winter ranges due to the sheep’s dependence on water sources in the summer. The BLM 
reported that the proposed Project could encounter desert bighorn sheep near the Palo Verde Wilderness 
Area, which is approximately 1 mile west of the B-Line near MP 31.0. As discussed in Section 4.6.2.4, 
the multi-species WHMA that would be crossed by the B-Line between approximate MPs 35.2 and 50.0 
includes two corridor portions of proposed WHMAs for bighorn sheep between MPs 35.2 and 42.0 and 
MPs 49.0 and 50.0. 

Impacts on desert bighorn sheep are likely to be indirect in nature, resulting from noise-related 
disturbance during construction. All construction activities would occur within the approved construction 
work area and North Baja would inform workers that bighorn sheep may occur in the area. 

Based on the distance of the Project from the Palo Verde Wilderness Area and because desert 
bighorn sheep are highly mobile and wide ranging and would likely avoid construction activities, impacts 
on the desert bighorn sheep would be less than significant. 

4.7.6.3 Brown-crested Flycatcher 

The brown-crested flycatcher is a California species of special concern. It inhabits desert riparian 
habitat along the lower Colorado River and requires thickets, trees, snags, and shrubs for foraging and 
perching, as well as nesting cavities and appropriate cover (CDFG 2000). This species breeds from May 
through September along the Colorado River south to Yuma; however, excessive clearing of the riparian 
forest along the lower Colorado River south to Yuma has made this species a rare breeder in the area 
(Small 1994). 

Suitable riparian and desert wash woodland habitat for the brown-crested flycatcher occurs along 
the proposed B-Line in the lower Colorado River basin between MPs 22.0 to 23.0, 35.0 to 36.0, 41.0 to 
46.0, 50.0 to 53.0, and 59.0 to 66.0 (Konecny 2000). Clearing of suitable habitat during construction of 
the proposed Project during the breeding season could result in injury or death of adults and young, if still 
in the nest, or abandonment of nests if they are located near the right-of-way. North Baja currently 
proposes to complete construction of the B-Line after the breeding season. Per its general conservation 
measures, North Baja would preclear vegetation along the B-Line if the schedule was modified such that 
construction would be necessary during the breeding season, thereby preventing individuals from nesting 
in areas that would be disturbed during construction. Additionally, per the Agency Staffs’ 
recommendation in Section 4.6.2.3, preconstruction clearing would be conducted in accordance with 
recommendations from the FWS, the BLM, and the CDFG. The minor, incremental loss of unoccupied 
habitat would not be expected to have direct or indirect impacts on individuals or reduce the abundance of 


4-118 


brown-crested flycatchers in the area because the proposed Project would be adjacent to an existing 
cleared right-of-way. Thus, fragmentation of undisturbed suitable habitat would not occur. With 
implementation of North Baja’s general mitigation measures, the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 
is not expected to reduce the abundance of or alter habitat important for the brown-crested flycatcher that 
could contribute to a trend towards Federal or State listing. As a result, impacts on this species would be 
less than significant. 

4.7.6.4 Burrowing Owl 

The burrowing owl is a California species of special concern and a BLM sensitive species. This 
species is found in parts of the western United States, and inhabits open, dry grasslands, deserts, 
agricultural areas, and scrublands with low-growing vegetation. Burrowing owls are subterranean nesters 
and are typically found using burrows made by small mammals, such as ground squirrels or badgers. 

Burrowing owls are known to occur in the irrigated desert agricultural areas along the proposed 
B-Line and BEI Lateral in the Palo Verde Valley and along the IID Lateral in the Imperial Valley, 
showing that burrowing owl populations have adapted to agricultural activities in these areas. FERC staff 
observed several burrowing owls adjacent to the road shoulders along 18 th Avenue in summer 2005. 
Burrowing owls are also occasionally seen in the open desert, and one pair was noted south of Interstate 8 
in an OHV area during construction of the A-Line in 2002. The B-Line would cross suitable burrowing 
owl habitat from MPs 0.0 to 12.0 (which includes 18 th Avenue), and the IID Lateral would cross suitable 
burrowing owl habitat from MPs 28.0 to 46.0. 

A primary component of North Baja’s impact minimization efforts would include identification 
of active burrows before construction. Owls occupying burrows within 250 feet of the construction work 
area would be left alone and monitored or passively or actively relocated to appropriate and previously 
installed artificial or available alternate natural burrows. Only biologists approved by the CDFG in 
advance would handle owls or install one-way doors during relocation activities. The management 
strategy utilized would be determined on a case-by-case basis. In addition to relocation or monitoring 
efforts, North Baja would implement the following measures to minimize impacts on the burrowing owl: 

• Direct impacts on burrowing owl habitat would be minimized by constructing in the road 
pavement or road shoulder in agricultural areas or by boring/drilling beneath habitat areas 
(e.g., canals and drains). 

• Preconstruction surveys during the breeding season would be conducted by biologists 
who would visually check all potential habitat within 250 feet of both sides of the 
proposed construction work area within 1 week before construction. 

• Unoccupied burrows discovered within the construction right-of-way during 
preconstruction surveys would be collapsed or excavated before construction activities to 
prevent occupancy by burrowing owls. 

• Artificial burrows, installed to minimize the effect of burrow loss, would be placed 
within the home range of individual owls that would be affected before burrow 
excavation or installation of one-way doors. 

In addition to these avoidance and minimization efforts, if any active burrows are damaged by 
construction activities, North Baja would provide compensation at the equivalency rate of 6.5 acres of 
foraging habitat for burrowing owls for each active burrow damaged. 


4-119 


North Baja has indicated that implementation of these measures through an adaptive management 
plan during construction of the A-Line effectively avoided or minimized impacts on burrowing owls. 
Although individual burrowing owls could be affected by construction activities, with implementation of 
North Baja’s proposed measures, the Agency Staffs do not expect the Project to reduce the overall 
abundance of the species in the area, cause a temporary loss or alteration of important habitat for the 
species, or result in other direct or indirect impacts that could contribute to or result in Federal or State 
listing of the burrowing owl. As a result, impacts on this species would be less than significant. 

4.7.6.5 Crissal Thrasher 

The Crissal thrasher is a species of special concern in California. This migratory bird species is 
generally intolerant of human disturbance and occurs in the southwestern deserts of the United States, 
including along the lower Colorado River in California. This species inhabits brushy thickets or dense 
understories of desert riparian and desert wash habitats. Loose soils (not too firm or sandy) suitable for 
digging up insect prey are a strong habitat indicator for this species. 

Potential habitat for the Crissal thrasher occurs along the B-Line near the Colorado River and the 
town of Blythe (MPs 0.0 to 3.0), the town of Palo Verde (MPs 24.0 to 29.0), and the Davis Lake area 
(MPs 31.0 to 33.0). One individual was observed near the pipeline route along 18 th Avenue in Blythe 
during construction of the A-Line in 2002. Additionally, a Crissal thrasher was reported in the area of 
Stallard Road (MP 25.0) during the southwestern willow flycatcher surveys in 2005. No potential habitat 
for the Crissal thrasher was identified along the BEI or IID Laterals. 

Because habitat for this species would recover slowly after construction, any impacts would result 
in a long-term reduction of available habitat. If Crissal thrashers are present during the breeding season 
(early February to June), the noise from construction could indirectly affect these birds. Birds disturbed 
by construction of the proposed Project would most likely be displaced into adjacent habitats, potentially 
disrupting breeding activities and annual production for one season. North Baja currently proposes to 
complete construction of the B-Line after the breeding season. Per its general conservation measures. 
North Baja would preclear vegetation along the B-Line if the schedule was modified such that 
construction would be necessary during the breeding season, thereby preventing individuals from nesting 
in areas that would be disturbed during construction. Additionally, per the Agency Staffs’ 
recommendation in Section 4.6.2.3, preconstruction clearing would be conducted in accordance with 
recommendations from the FWS, the BLM, and the CDFG. The minor, incremental loss of unoccupied 
habitat would not be expected to have direct or indirect impacts on individuals or reduce the abundance of 
the Crissal thrasher in the area because the proposed Project would be adjacent to an existing cleared 
right-of-way. Thus, fragmentation of undisturbed suitable habitat would not occur. 

Further, North Baja would minimize the potential for long-term impacts on the Crissal thrasher 
by compensating for loss of microphyll woodland habitat through payment of an assessed financial 
contribution at a ratio approved by the FWS, the BLM, and the CDFG for those areas not already covered 
by desert tortoise habitat compensation. 

With the implementation of North Baja’s conservation measures and compensatory mitigation 
proposal, the Agency Staffs do not expect impacts to reduce the overall abundance of the species in the 
area, cause a temporary loss or alteration of important habitat for the species, or result in other direct or 
indirect impacts that could contribute to or result in Federal or State listing of the Crissal thrasher. As a 
result, impacts on this species would be less than significant. 


4-120 


4.7.6.6 Ferruginous Hawk 

The ferruginous hawk is a California species of special concern. This hawk is a migratory, non¬ 
breeding winter resident of California from September through April. Ferruginous hawks prefer open 
grasslands, desert scrub, and low foothills surrounding valleys where they hunt for small mammals, birds, 
reptiles, and amphibians. They are considered uncommon migrants in the Colorado River area and in 
grasslands and agricultural areas in southern California. 

The ferruginous hawk is an occasional migrant within the Project area. Construction of the 
proposed Project would have no impact on this species. 

4.7.6.7 Le Conte’s Thrasher 

The Le Conte’s thrasher is a migratory California species of special concern and a BLM sensitive 
species. This species lives mainly in the lowest, most barren and hottest desert plains of southwestern and 
western Arizona and southeastern California. The Le Conte’s thrasher occupies desert scrub, open 
washes, and Joshua tree habitats. 

Potential habitat for the Le Conte’s thrasher occurs along the proposed B-Line from MPs 12.0 to 
79.8. This species may also be present along the proposed IID Lateral in the scattered creosote bush 
scrub habitat between the ISDRA and the Imperial Valley from MPs 8.0 to 28.0. In lieu of conducting 
species-specific surveys. North Baja has indicated that it is assuming that the species is present 
throughout the area of suitable habitat. 

Because the habitat for this species would recover slowly after construction, any impacts would 
result in a long-term reduction of available habitat. If Le Conte’s thrashers are present during the 
breeding season (early February to June), the noise from construction could indirectly affect these birds. 
Birds disturbed by construction of the proposed Project would most likely be displaced into adjacent 
habitats, potentially disrupting breeding activities and annual production for one season. However, North 
Baja currently proposes to complete construction of the B-Line after the breeding season. Per its general 
conservation measures. North Baja would preclear vegetation along the B-Line if the schedule was 
modified such that construction would be necessary during the breeding season, thereby preventing 
individuals from nesting in areas that would be disturbed during construction. Additionally, per the 
Agency Staffs’ recommendation in Section 4.6.2.3, preconstruction clearing would be conducted in 
accordance with recommendations from the FWS, the BLM, and the CDFG. The minor, incremental loss 
of unoccupied habitat would not be expected to have direct or indirect impacts on individuals or reduce 
the abundance of the Le Conte’s thrasher in the area because the proposed Project would be adjacent to an 
existing cleared right-of-way. Thus, fragmentation of undisturbed suitable habitat would not occur. 

Further, North Baja would minimize the potential for long-term impacts on the Le Conte’s 
thrasher by compensating for loss of microphyll woodland habitat through payment of an assessed 
financial contribution at a ratio approved by the FWS, the BLM, and the CDFG for those areas not 
already covered by desert tortoise habitat compensation. 

With the implementation of North Baja’s general conservation measures and compensatory 
mitigation proposal, the Agency Staffs do not expect impacts to reduce the overall abundance of the 
species in the area, cause a temporary loss or alteration of important habitat for the species, or result in 
other direct or indirect impacts that could contribute to or result in Federal or State listing of the Le 
Conte’s thrasher. As a result, impacts on this species would be less than significant. 


4-121 


4.7.6.8 Summer Tanager 

The summer tanager is a California species of special concern that has historically utilized 
southern California as a major breeding area along the lower Colorado River and the Imperial Valley. 
This species is a rare fall and winter visitor and a late spring transient (Small 1994). The summer tanager 
inhabits desert riparian habitat along the lower Colorado River and requires cottonwood-willow riparian 
areas for nesting and foraging (CDFG 2000). Deforestation along the lower Colorado River has 
destroyed much of the available habitat, and the population has been much reduced (Small 1994). 

Suitable habitat for the summer tanager is present along the proposed B-Line along the lower 
Colorado River basin (MPs 22.0 to 23.0, 35.0 to 36.0, 41.0 to 46.0, 50.0 to 53.0, and 59.0 to 66.0) 
(Konecny 2000). Because habitat for this species would recover slowly after construction, any impacts 
would result in a long-term reduction of available habitat. If summer tanagers are present during the 
breeding season (early February to June), the noise from construction could indirectly affect these birds. 
Birds disturbed by construction of the proposed Project would most likely be displaced into adjacent 
habitats, potentially disrupting breeding activities and annual production for one season. However, North 
Baja currently proposes to complete construction of the B-Line after the breeding season. Per its general 
conservation measures, North Baja would preclear vegetation along the B-Line if the schedule was 
modified such that construction would be necessary during the breeding season, thereby preventing 
individuals from nesting in areas that would be disturbed during construction. Additionally, per the 
Agency Staffs’ recommendation in Section 4.6.2.3, preconstruction clearing would be conducted in 
accordance with recommendations from the FWS, the BLM, and the CDFG. The minor, incremental loss 
of unoccupied habitat would not be expected to have direct or indirect impacts on individuals or reduce 
the abundance of the summer tanager in the area because the proposed Project would be adjacent to an 
existing cleared right-of-way. Thus, fragmentation of undisturbed suitable habitat would not occur. 

With the implementation of North Baja’s general conservation measures, the Agency Staffs do 
not expect Project-related impacts to reduce the overall abundance of the species in the area, cause a 
temporary loss or alteration of important habitat for the species, or result in other direct or indirect 
impacts that could contribute to or result in Federal or State listing of the summer tanager. As a result, 
impacts on this species would be less than significant. 

4.7.6.9 Vermilion Flycatcher 

The vermilion flycatcher is a species of special concern in California, and is a common and 
widespread breeder along the lower Colorado River and in the Coachella and Imperial Valleys. The 
vermilion flycatcher occurs in desert riparian habitat adjacent to irrigated fields, irrigation ditches, 
pastures, and other open mesic sites. 

Suitable habitat for the vermilion flycatcher occurs along the proposed B-Line in the desert 
riparian areas of the lower Colorado River basin (MPs 0.0 to 12.0, 22.0 to 29.0, 31.0 to 33.0, 35.0 to 53.0, 
59.0 to 66.0, and 79.0 to 79.8). No suitable habitat for the vermillion flycatcher occurs along the BEI 
Lateral, and the vermilion flycatcher is not known to occur in the area of the proposed IID Lateral. 
Because habitat for this species would recover slowly after construction, any impacts would result in a 
long-term reduction of available habitat. If vermillion flycatchers are present during the breeding season 
(early February to June), the noise from construction could indirectly affect these birds. Birds disturbed 
by construction of the proposed Project would most likely be displaced into adjacent habitats, potentially 
disrupting breeding activities and annual production for one season. However, North Baja currently 
proposes to complete construction of the B-Line after the breeding season. Per its general conservation 
measures, North Baja would preclear vegetation along the B-Line if the schedule was modified such that 
construction would be necessary during the breeding season, thereby preventing individuals from nesting 


4-122 


in areas that would be disturbed during construction. Additionally, per the Agency Staffs’ 
recommendation in Section 4.6.2.3, preconstruction clearing would be conducted in accordance with 
recommendations from the FWS, the BLM, and the CDFG. The minor, incremental loss of unoccupied 
habitat would not be expected to have direct or indirect impacts on individuals or reduce the abundance of 
the vermillion flycatcher in the area because the proposed Project would be adjacent to an existing cleared 
right-of-way. Thus, fragmentation of undisturbed suitable habitat would not occur. 

Potential habitat for the vermilion flycatcher at the B-Line Colorado River crossing location is 
substantially degraded. Additionally, the use of the HDD method to install the pipeline beneath the river 
would serve to avoid impacts on this already degraded habitat. The implementation of the HDD method 
in addition to North Baja’s general conservation measures would serve to substantially reduce the 
potential impacts of the Project on the vermilion flycatcher. As such, the Agency Staffs do not expect 
Project-related impacts to reduce the overall abundance of the species in the area, cause a temporary loss 
or alteration of important habitat for the species, or result in other direct or indirect impacts that could 
contribute to or result in Federal or State listing of the vermillion flycatcher. As a result, impacts on this 
species would be less than significant. 

4.7.6.10 Yellow-breasted Chat 

The yellow-breasted chat is a California species of special concern. This species is a fairly 
common breeder and is local to the lower Colorado River extending south to Yuma (Small 1994). The 
yellow-breasted chat inhabits riparian thickets of willow and other bushy tangles near watercourses 
(CDFG 2000). Widespread habitat deterioration and elimination, coupled with brood parasitism by 
brown-headed cowbirds, has diminished its status to an uncommon spring migrant from early-April to 
mid-May. 

Suitable habitat for the yellow-breasted chat was identified along the proposed B-Line along the 
Colorado River in Blythe (MPs 0.0 to 3.0), the town of Palo Verde (MPs 22.0 to 23.0), and the Davis 
Lake area (MPs 31.0 to 33.0) (Konecny 2000). There is no suitable habitat for this species along the 
proposed BEI or IID Laterals. Because habitat for this species would recover slowly after construction, 
any impacts would result in a long-term reduction of available habitat. If yellow-breasted chats are 
present during the breeding season (early February to June), the noise from construction could indirectly 
affect these birds. Birds disturbed by construction of the proposed Project would most likely be displaced 
into adjacent habitats, potentially disrupting breeding activities and annual production for one season. 
However, North Baja currently proposes to complete construction of the B-Line after the breeding season. 
Per its general conservation measures, North Baja would preclear vegetation along the B-Line if the 
schedule was modified such that construction would be necessary during the breeding season, thereby 
preventing individuals from nesting in areas that would be disturbed during construction. Additionally, 
per the Agency Staffs’ recommendation in Section 4.6.2.3, preconstruction clearing would be conducted 
in accordance with recommendations from the FWS, the BLM, and the CDFG. The minor, incremental 
loss of unoccupied habitat would not be expected to have direct or indirect impacts on individuals or 
reduce the abundance of the yellow-breasted chat in the area because the proposed Project would be 
adjacent to an existing cleared right-of-way. Thus, fragmentation of undisturbed suitable habitat would 
not occur. 

With the implementation of North Baja’s general conservation measures, the Agency Staffs do 
not expect Project-related impacts to reduce the overall abundance of the species in the area, cause a 
temporary loss or alteration of important habitat for the species, or result in other direct or indirect 
impacts that could contribute to or result in Federal or State listing of the yellow-breasted chat. As a 
result, impacts on this species would be less than significant. 


4-123 


4.7.6.11 Colorado River Toad 


The Colorado River toad, also called the Sonoran Desert toad, is a California species of special 
concern. This species is closely associated with permanent or semi-permanent water sources, usually 
flowing water, and was historically present in California along the channel of the lower Colorado River 
and in the southern Imperial Valley. These toads are documented to occur up the Colorado River from 
Fort Yuma to the Blythe-Ehrenberg area. Severe habitat alteration in the lower Colorado River region has 
impacted this species. 

The proposed B-Line would cross the Colorado River and associated riparian areas at about MP 
0.2 using the HDD method. This method would not require surface disturbance within the river or in the 
adjacent banks or wetlands. If a frac-out occurred during the HDD of the river, drilling mud could be 
released into areas adjacent to the river and North Baja’s efforts to contain those drilling mud could 
further affect potential habitat for the Colorado River toad. However, successful HDDs of the Colorado 
River have been completed in the vicinity of the B-Line crossing and North Baja does not anticipate 
difficulties with the crossing for the proposed Project. The Agency Staffs agree that the proposed HDD 
crossing is likely to be successful; therefore, the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project is not expected to 
reduce the abundance of the species in the area, cause a temporary loss or alteration of important habitat 
for the species, or result in other direct or indirect impacts on the Colorado River toad that could 
contribute to a trend towards Federal or State listing. As a result, impacts on this species would be less 
than significant. 

4.7.6.12 Couch’s Spadefoot Toad 

The Couch’s spadefoot toad is a California species of special concern that can be found in a 
variety of vegetation types, including desert dry wash woodland, creosote bush scrub, and alkali sink 
scrub. This species is adapted to an arid environment and spends up to 11 months a year in underground 
burrows surviving off stored fat reserves. During wet conditions, spadefoot toads breed in temporary rain 
pools or temporary overflow areas. 

The CDFG has indicated that a population of spadefoot toads is historically known to occur along 
one of the dry washes crossed by the proposed B-Line (the Milpitas Wash [MP 35.3]). Additionally, one 
Couch’s spadefoot toad was found during construction of the A-Line in the Stallard Road wash area (MP 
25.0) in 2002 (North Baja 2002). There are no recorded occurrences of this species in the CNDDB 
database quadrangles of the IID Lateral. 

Construction of the proposed Project in areas of occupied habitat could result in mortality or 
injury to individual Couch’s spadefoot toads due to entrapment in open trenches or as a result of being 
crushed by vehicles and displaced soil. Construction disturbances to rain pools or temporary overflow 
areas could disrupt breeding activities and annual production for one season, which could potentially 
significantly affect local populations of Couch’s spadefoot toad. 

To minimize impacts on individuals and populations of the Couch’s spadefoot toad. North Baja 
has proposed the following mitigation measures: 

• If local thunderstorms occur in the habitat identified by the CDFG and provide 
substantial moisture under warm conditions (temperatures over 90 °F) in July, August, or 
September, and if construction has not already been completed in that area, North Baja 
biologists would examine potential Couch’s spadefoot toad habitat for persistent pools. 
The CDFG would notify North Baja if appropriate conditions prevail, and North Baja 
would coordinate with the CDFG to complete the surveys. 


4-124 


• Authorized biologists would monitor temporary pools for persistence and would examine 
them daily for eggs, tadpoles, or toadlets. 

• Construction activities would not be conducted within 150 feet of temporary pools. If 
water fails to persist within shallow pools for 10 days, or if no Couch’s spadefoot toad 
eggs, tadpoles, or toadlets are found within 10 days, then construction would resume in 
the area. 

• If any Couch’s spadefoot toads are found, the CDFG would be immediately notified. A 
report on the findings would be submitted to the CDFG within 30 days of completion of 
the construction activities within the area. 

With implementation of North Baja’s general conservation measures as well as the specific 
measures detailed above, the Agency Staffs do not expect Project-related impacts to reduce the overall 
abundance of the species in the area, cause a temporary loss or alteration of important habitat for the 
species, or result in other direct or indirect impacts that could contribute to or result in Federal or State 
listing of the Couch’s spadefoot toads. As a result, impacts on this species would be less than significant. 

4.7.6.13 Flat-tailed Horned Lizard 

The flat-tailed horned lizard is a California species of special concern and a BLM sensitive 
species. The proposal to list the flat-tailed horned lizard as a federally threatened species under the ESA 
was withdrawn by the FWS on June 20, 2006 (Federal Register 71:36745). The range of the flat-tailed 
homed lizard includes the Salton Sea and the Imperial Sand Dunes of California, as well as the low 
deserts of southwestern Arizona, northern Baja California, and the northwestern Sonoran Desert. This 
species is most abundant in areas of creosote bush, but may also be found in desert scmb, desert wash, 
succulent scrub, and alkali scmb habitats. Vegetation is usually scant in occupied areas, consisting of 
creosote bush or other scrubby growth. The present range of this species, and abundance in that range, 
has been greatly reduced over recent years by human activities such as development and recreational use 
of prime habitat. 

Suitable habitat for the flat-tailed horned lizard occurs along the proposed B-Line route from 
Ogilby extending south to the All-American Canal (MPs 71.0 to 79.8). North Baja’s biologists conducted 
surveys in the suitable habitat area in 2001 and categorized habitats as favorable (0.4 mile), transitional 
(4.1 miles), or unfavorable (4.3 miles) according to the Flat-tailed Horned Lizard Range Management 
Strategy (FTHLICC 2003). Flat-tailed homed lizards were observed between MPs 77.0 and 78.0 during 
surveys in 2000 and 2001, and were abundant between MPs 75.2 and 79.6 during construction of the A- 
Line. They are assumed to still be present in that area and are expected to occur in the same general 
locations during construction of the B-Line. 

Suitable habitat for the flat-tailed homed lizard is present along the IID Lateral from MPs 8.0 to 
28.0, and the presence of the flat-tailed horned lizard is assumed within this milepost range. The IID 
Lateral would be adjacent to the East Mesa Management Area, which is set aside primarily for protection 
of flat-tailed horned lizard habitat (BLM 2004). However, the Flat-tailed Horned Lizard Range 
Management Strategy, Revision 2003 specifies that areas within the road right-of-way of Evan Hughes 
Highway are not considered flat-tailed horned lizard habitat, and that the management area stops at the 
north edge of the road right-of-way (FTHLICC 2003). The IID Lateral would be entirely within the road 
right-of-way and, in some places, would be in the road shoulder. From MPs 13.6 to 16.2, the IID Lateral 
would be north of the existing transmission lines within the road right-of-way. A total of 25.2 acres of 
suitable flat-tailed homed lizard habitat would be disturbed during construction of the IID Lateral. 


4-125 


Construction of the pipeline through habitat occupied by the flat-tailed horned lizard could result 
in direct mortality or injury of individual lizards as a result of being crushed by vehicles, movement of 
soil, and entrapment in open trenches. If construction occurs during extremely hot summer months, 
lizards can die if entrapped in open trenches. Ten lizards were known to have died and 15 were 
successfully relocated during construction of the A-Line in 2002. Construction noise and activity could 
also indirectly affect lizards by pushing them into similar adjacent habitat farther away from the 
construction work area; however, flat-tailed horned lizards would likely return to the habitat in the 
immediate vicinity of the right-of-way upon completion of construction activities. 

Based on the experience gained during construction of the A-Line, North Baja would implement 
the following mitigation measures to reduce impacts on flat-tailed horned lizards during construction of 
the B-Line (MPs 75.2 to 79.6) and the IID Lateral (MPs 8.0 to 28.0): 

• Authorized biologists would conduct preconstruction surveys to verify all flat-tailed 
homed lizard habitat in the construction area. Within 7 days before construction, 
biologists would identify habitat areas subject to direct construction-related ground 
disturbance. 

• Biologists would conduct a final clearance survey 1 to 2 days before construction 
activities, which would include excavating potential burrows and relocating lizards to 
nearby suitable habitat. North Baja would implement the management strategy 
guidelines for relocation of flat-tailed horned lizards described in the Flat-tailed Horned 
Lizard Range Management Strategy (FTHLICC 2003). 

• A field contact representative would initiate a worker education program and would have 
the authority to ensure compliance with protective measures for flat-tailed homed lizards. 

• A biological monitor would be present in each area of active construction within flat¬ 
tailed horned lizard habitat throughout the work day from initial clearing through habitat 
restoration. The biological monitors would have sufficient education, field experience, 
and training with this species to understand its biology and behavior. The monitors 
would ensure that all activities are in compliance with the management strategy 
guidelines for relocation of flat-tailed horned lizards. The biological monitors would also 
have the authority and responsibility to halt activities that are in violation of the 
management strategy guidelines. 

• In areas of suitable habitat (MPs 75.2 to 79.6 of the B-Line and MPs 8.0 to 28.0 of the 
IID Lateral), North Baja would restrict the amount of trench open at any one time to 2 
miles. Trench walkers would be employed in those areas such that each portion of open 
trench would be observed every 30 minutes when ground temperatures exceed 85°F (29.5 
°C). Each trench walker can cover 2 miles per hour; therefore, the open portion of trench 
(2 miles) would require two trench walkers during hot weather to provide the desired 
coverage. Trench walkers would be construction workers with no other duties than to 
walk along the side of the open trench and look for flat-tailed horned lizards. These 
workers would receive specialized flat-tailed horned lizard training under the supervision 
of the BLM biologist and would be directly supervised by a qualified biologist who has 
also received flat-tailed horned lizard training. Additionally, all hazardous sites, such as 
open pipes, trenches, holes, or deep excavations would be inspected for the presence of 
lizards before backfilling. 


4-126 


• If lizards are found trapped in an excavation, the authorized biologist would capture by 
hand and relocate the affected lizard. The management strategy guidelines for relocation 
of flat-tailed horned lizards described in the Flat-tailed Horned Lizard Range 
Management Strategy (FTHLICC 2003) would be used. 

The Agency Staffs recognize that individual lizards may be harmed or killed, and that occupied 
habitat would be adversely impacted by construction. However, based on the mitigation measures 
described above (e.g., preconstruction clearance surveys, biological monitors present during construction, 
lizard relocation as necessary, restricted open trench lengths), the Agency Staffs do not expect the Project 
to reduce the overall abundance of the species in the area or result in other direct or indirect impacts that 
could contribute to or result in Federal or State listing of the flat-tailed homed lizard. 

Nonetheless, based on impacts expected during construction of the proposed Project, impacts on 
this species and its habitat would be considered significant. Therefore, approval of the Project would be 
subject to a Statement of Overriding Considerations under the CEQA. 

4.7.6.14 Fairyduster 

The fairyduster has been listed as a category 2 species (rare throughout all or portions of its range 
in California, but common beyond the boundaries of California) by the CNPS. This species is a 
deciduous shrub known to occur in Imperial and San Diego Counties in California, and is found in 
Sonoran Desert scmb, creosote bush scrub, and desert dry wash woodland habitats, as well as along desert 
washes (Skinner and Pavlik 1994). 

North Baja’s botanists surveyed the proposed B-Line route and identified fairyduster plants from 
a series of locations between MPs 45.1 to 49.8, 53.6 to 57.4, and 65.1 to 66.6. Marginal habitat for this 
species may occur along the IID Lateral. In lieu of conducting species-specific surveys, North Baja has 
indicated that it is assuming that the species is present throughout the area of suitable habitat along the 
IID Lateral. 

Pipeline construction activities (e.g., clearing, grading, trenching, backfilling, excavation) would 
directly affect plants found within the construction work area. However, the loss of individual plants is 
not anticipated to affect the local or regional population of the species due to the relative abundance in the 
area. Construction would temporarily affect suitable habitat for the fairyduster. However, post¬ 
construction surveys of the A-Line right-of-way have shown that restoration of the pipeline right-of-way 
allows native plants to re-establish in areas disturbed by construction. 

Although North Baja’s general conservation measures, including topsoil segregation, would 
substantially reduce impact on this species, construction of the B-Line and the IID Lateral may result in 
the removal of individual plants. However, the reproduction potential of the local population would not 
be affected; therefore, construction of the B-Line and IID Lateral would not have an adverse impact on 
the population of fairyduster. As such, the Agency Staffs do not expect impacts to reduce the overall 
abundance of the species in the area, cause a temporary loss or alteration of important habitat for the 
species, or result in other direct or indirect impacts that could contribute to or result in Federal or State 
listing of the fairyduster. Therefore, impacts on this species would be less than significant. 

4.7.6.15 Giant Spanish-needle 

The giant Spanish-needle is a Federal species of concern, has been designated category IB by the 
CNPS, and is a BLM sensitive species. This plant is an annual herb that occurs in the Sonoran Desert of 


4-127 


southeastern Imperial County within active and stable sand dunes (Skinner and Pavlik 1994). The giant 
Spanish-needle blooms from February to May, and its main threat is OHV traffic (CDFG 2000). 

Suitable habitat for the giant Spanish-needle is found along the IID Lateral in the southern 
Algodones Dunes within the ISDRA (MPs 0.5 to 7.9). In lieu of conducting species-specific surveys, 
North Baja has indicated that it is assuming that the species is present throughout the area of suitable 
habitat. Although the general mitigation measures, including topsoil segregation, would substantially 
reduce impact on this species, construction of the IID Lateral may result in the removal of individual 
plants. However, construction of the IID Lateral would not adversely impact the reproduction potential of 
the local population of the giant Spanish-needle. As a result, with the implementation of North Baja’s 
general conservation measures, including the efforts to minimize the spread of non-native species, the 
Agency Staffs do not expect impacts to reduce the overall abundance of the species in the area, cause a 
temporary loss or alteration of important habitat for the species, or result in other direct or indirect 
impacts that could contribute to or result in Federal or State listing of the giant Spanish-needle. 
Therefore, impacts on this species would be less than significant. 

4.7.6.16 Sand Food 

The sand food is a category IB species as designated by the CNPS. This plant is a perennial herb 
that occurs in the Sonoran Desert of southeastern Imperial County, western Arizona, and northwestern 
New Mexico (Skinner and Pavlik 1994), and occurs on the lee side of stabilized and partially stabilized 
desert dunes (CDFG 2000). The sand food blooms from April to June and is primarily threatened by 
OHV traffic and military activities (Skinner and Pavlik 1994). 

Suitable habitat for the sand food is found along the proposed IID Lateral in the southern 
Algodones Dunes within the ISDRA (MPs 0.5 to 7.9). In lieu of conducting species-specific surveys. 
North Baja has indicated that it is assuming that the species is present throughout the area of suitable 
habitat. Although North Baja’s general conservation measures, including topsoil segregation, would 
substantially reduce impact on this species, construction of the IID Lateral may result in the removal of 
individual plants. However, the reproduction potential of the local population would not be affected; 
therefore, construction of the IID Lateral would not adversely impact the population of the sand food. As 
a result, with the implementation of North Baja’s general conservation measures, including the efforts to 
minimize the spread of non-native species, the Agency Staffs do not expect impacts to reduce the overall 
abundance of the species in the area, cause a temporary loss or alteration of important habitat for the 
species, or result in other direct or indirect impacts that could contribute to or result in Federal or State 
listing of the sand food. Therefore, impacts on this species would be less than significant. 

4.7.7 Cumulative, Interdependent, and Interrelated Effects 

Section 7 of the ESA requires the Federal action agency to provide an analysis of cumulative 
effects when it requests initiation of formal consultation. Under the ESA, cumulative effects include the 
effects of future State, tribal, local, or private actions that are reasonably certain to occur in the action 
area. Future Federal actions that are unrelated to the proposed action are not considered because they 
would require a separate consultation pursuant to section 7 of the ESA. 

Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor, but collectively significant, actions 
taking place over a period of time. Several other existing or planned activities in the general area of the 
proposed Project could have a cumulative impact with North Baja’s proposed Project. Table 4.15-1 lists 
the projects that the Agency Staffs are aware of through the scoping process and additional research. In 
general, the projects listed that have the potential to impact wildlife and vegetation are those most likely 
to have a cumulative impact on special status species. 


4-128 


The geographic area considered in determining past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects 
that could also have impacts on wildlife and vegetation includes the planning areas as designated by the 
BLM, the Palo Verde Valley, and the Imperial Valley. To determine non-Federal projects that are 
reasonably foreseeable, the Agency Staffs included those that have made formal proposals or engaged in a 
permitting process, and those that are included in agency plans or forecasts. A detailed discussion of 
projects considered for this cumulative impact analysis is included in Section 4.15. 

When projects are constructed at the same time or are timed closely together, they could have a 
cumulative impact on vegetation and wildlife living in the area where the projects are built, even if the 
impacts are temporary. The removal of desert vegetation could have long-term consequences because the 
regeneration of vegetation in arid desert environments is slow. This effect is more severe in desert wash 
woodlands, which are less prevalent locally and provide more diverse wildlife habitat than creosote bush 
scrub. In addition to the proposed Project, the transmission line projects, the landfill, and the Mesquite 
Mine expansion would all adversely impact desert wash woodlands. Each of these projects is required to 
provide compensatory payments or land purchases equivalent to at least 3 acres for each acre disturbed. 
This, and the minimization of construction in desert wash woodlands, as required in each project by the 
terms of the section 1603 permit issued by the CDFG would reduce or mitigate the individual and 
cumulative impacts of these projects on desert wash woodlands. Further, none of the pipeline facilities 
would result in permanent impacts on vegetation or habitat, although regrowth would be slow. 

The amount of desert wash woodland, desert dunes, and creosote bush scrub habitat that may be 
affected by these projects is relatively small compared to the abundance of habitat in the area. These 
projects would not fragment vegetation/habitat in addition to the fragmentation already existing due to the 
A-Line right-of-way, Interstate 8, the existing canal, and the existing recreation and Border Patrol access 
roads. All of the projects in California would involve mitigation measures designed to minimize the 
potential for long-term chronic erosion, increase the stabilization of site conditions, control the spread of 
noxious weeds, minimize the potential for accidental spills of materials into surface waters, and minimize 
the impact on special status species. This mitigation would minimize the degree and duration of the 
cumulative impacts of these projects. 

4.7.8 Summary of Determinations of Effect for Federally Listed Species 

Based on informal consultation with the FWS, 9 federally listed species were identified as 
potentially occurring in the general vicinity of (within the counties crossed by) the Project. After further 
consultations with the FWS, the BLM, and the CDFG, and completion of field surveys, a determination 
of effect for each of these species was developed. Two of the 9 species (desert tortoise and Peirson’s 
milk-vetch) were identified as likely to be adversely affected by the proposed Project. Critical habitat for 
the desert tortoise was also identified as likely to be adversely affected. In compliance with section 7 of 
the ESA, the Agency Staffs have submitted this draft EIS/EIR to the FWS with a request for concurrence 
with these determinations of effect and to initiate formal consultation. The FWS would issue a BO as to 
whether or not the proposed Project would likely jeopardize the continued existence of the desert tortoise 
and the Peirson’s milk-vetch or critical habitat for the desert tortoise. Table 4.7.8-1 provides a summary 
of the impact evaluation for federally listed species (and critical habitat, if present in the Project area) and 
for State-listed species with the potential to occur in the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project area. 


4-129 



TABLE 4.7.8-1 


Summary of Assessment of Project Impacts on Listed Species 

Species or Critical Habitat 

Federal Status 

State Status 

Project Impact 

Species listed under both Federal and California Endangered Species Acts 


Peirson’s milk-vetch 

Threatened 

Endangered 

May affect, likely to adversely affect 

Razorback sucker 

Endangered 

Endangered 

May affect, not likely to adversely affect 

Razorback sucker critical habitat 



May affect, not likely to adversely affect 

Desert pupfish 

Endangered 

Endangered 

No effect 

Bonytail chub 

Endangered 

Rare 

No effect 

Desert tortoise 

Threatened 

Threatened 

May affect, likely to adversely affect 

Desert tortoise critical habitat 



May affect, likely to adversely affect 

Brown pelican 

Threatened 

Endangered 

No effect 

Bald eagle 

Threatened 

Endangered 

No effect 

Southwestern willow flycatcher 

Endangered 

Endangered 

May affect, not likely to adversely affect 

Yuma clapper rail 

Endangered 

Threatened 

May affect, not likely to adversely affect 

Species listed only under the California Endangered Species Act 


Algodones Dune sunflower 


Endangered 

May affect individuals, unlikely to adversely 
affect population 

Wiggins’s croton 


Rare 

May affect individuals, unlikely to adversely 
affect population 

Arizona Bell’s vireo 


Endangered 

No adverse effect 

Western yellow-billed cuckoo 

Candidate 

Endangered 

No adverse effect 

Elf owl 


Endangered 

No effect 

California black rail 


Threatened 

No adverse effect 

Gila woodpecker 


Endangered 

No adverse effect 


As required by the CESA, consultation has occurred with the CDFG to determine the proposed 
Project's effect on California-listed species. As described above, it is expected that the North Baja 
Pipeline Expansion Project would avoid adverse impacts on individuals or populations of the following 
California-listed threatened or endangered species: razorback sucker, desert pupfish, brown pelican, bald 
eagle, southwestern willow flycatcher, Yuma clapper rail, Algodones dune sunflower, Arizona bell’s 
vireo, western yellow-billed cuckoo, elf owl, California black rail, and Gila woodpecker. However, the 
Federal and California-listed threatened desert tortoise and the federally listed threatened and California- 
listed endangered Peirson’s milk-vetch would likely be adversely affected by construction of the Project. 
Because these species are California-listed as well as federally listed, the CDFG would review the BO 
prepared by the FWS and consider the issuance of a consistency determination pursuant to section 2080.1 
of the California Fish and Game Code. Additionally, approval of the Project would require the CSLC to 
prepare a Statement of Overriding Considerations under the CEQA if, after mitigation is applied, the 
CSLC finds that the impacts of the Project would not be reduced to a level that is less than significant. 

Construction of the proposed Project is currently scheduled to be completed in three phases, with 
construction of the last phase beginning in late summer of 2009. Due to the potential inhabitation of 
suitable habitats found to be lacking individuals during surveys in 2005, and the potential for new species 
to become listed under State or Federal law in the future, the Agency Staffs recommend that: 

• For those areas where construction would occur more than 1 year from the date of 
issuance of the FERC and CSLC approvals for the Project, North Baja shall consult 
with the FWS, the BLM, and the CDFG to update the species list and to verify that 
previous consultations and determinations of effect are still current. Documentation 
of these consultations, and the need for additional surveys and survey reports (if 
required), and FWS, BLM, and CDFG comments on the surveys and survey reports 


4-130 





and their conclusions (as applicable), shall be filed with the FERC and the CSLC 

before construction . 

Further, to ensure that potential impacts on special status species would be avoided or mitigated 
to less than significant levels, as well as to comply with the ESA and the CESA, the Agency Staffs 
recommend that: 

• North Baja shall not begin construction activities until : 

a. the FERC completes section 7 consultation with the FWS; 

b. the CDFG makes a consistency determination on the FWS’ BO pursuant to 
section 2080.1 of the California Fish and Game Code or issues an Incidental 
Take Permit that covers both federally and State-listed species that may be 
affected; 

c. North Baja obtains an Incidental Take Permit under section 2081 of the 
California Fish and Game Code for all State-listed species that may be 
affected, or receives concurrence from the CDFG that an Incidental Take 
Permit is not required; 

d. North Baja has completed and filed with the FERC and the CSLC the 
results of consultations with the BLM regarding measures to avoid or 
minimize impacts on special status species on lands managed by the BLM; 
and 

e. North Baja has received written notification from the Director of OEP and 
the Executive Officer of the CSLC that construction or use of conservation 
measures may begin. 

4.7.9 Arrowhead Alternative 

The Arrowhead Extension would be constructed within the shoulder of an existing levee road or 
at the base of the road shoulder slope. The general area in the vicinity of the pipeline route and 
aboveground facility sites is dominated by active agriculture. North Baja conducted a survey for special 
status species along the Arrowhead Alternative in the spring of 2006. No special status plant species were 
identified during the surveys. Given the disturbed nature of the alternative route and surrounding 
landscape, habitat for other special status species is generally absent from the area. However, North Baja 
identified one probable burrowing owl burrow and an individual burrowing owl adjacent to a burrow at 
approximate MP 1.5 along the route. If the Arrowhead Alternative were adopted, North Baja would 
implement conservation measures similar to those agreed upon for the proposed Project, including 
avoidance of burrows as applicable, relocation of individuals as needed, and compensation for any 
burrows directly affected by construction. 

No other special status species were identified along the pipeline route or at the proposed 
aboveground facility sites associated with the alternative. With implementation of the proposed 
measures to avoid, minimize, and mitigate for potential impacts on burrowing owls, the Arrowhead 
Alternative is not likely to result in adverse effects on burrowing owls or other special status species. 


4-131 




4.7.10 No Project Alternative 

Under the No Project Alternative, the FERC would deny North Baja’s application for a 
Certificate and a Presidential Permit amendment, the CSLC would deny North Baja’s application for an 
amendment to its right-of-way lease across California’s Sovereign and School Lands, and the BLM would 
deny North Baja’s application to amend its existing Right-of-Way Grant and obtain a Temporary Use 
Permit for the portion of the Project on Federal lands. The No Project Alternative means that the Project 
would not go forward and the Project-related facilities would not be installed. Accordingly, none of the 
potential environmental impacts identified for the construction and operation of the proposed Project 
would occur. 

Because the proposed Project is privately funded, it is unknown whether North Baja would fund 
another energy project in California. However, should the No Project Alternative be selected, the energy 
needs identified in Section 1.1 would likely be addressed through other means, such as through other 
LNG or natural gas-related pipeline projects. Such projects may result in potential environmental impacts 
of the nature and magnitude of the proposed Project as well as impacts particular to their respective 
configurations and operations; however, these impacts cannot be predicted with any certainty at this time. 


4-132 


4.8 LAND USE, SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREAS, RECREATION AND PUBLIC 
INTEREST AREAS, AND AESTHETIC RESOURCES 

4.8.1 Significance Criteria 

An adverse impact on land use, special management areas, recreation and public interest areas, 
and aesthetic resources would be considered significant and would require mitigation if Project 
construction or operation would: 

• conflict with existing land use plans, policies, or regulations established by a jurisdiction 
directly affected by the Project (see Section 1.5); 

• convert more than 1 percent of agricultural lands in a county to a non-agricultural use or 
impair the productivity of more than 1 percent of agricultural land in a county; 

• result in the loss of more than 1 percent of the acreage planted in a county’s most 
valuable crop; 

• displace a business or permanent residence from its established location, or disrupt access 
to a business or permanent residence for more than 14 days; 

• conflict with any approved residential or commercial development plans; 

• cause long-term property damage and create construction-related hazards to residents of 
dwellings within 100 feet of the pipeline; 

• physically divide an established community; 

• prevent access to an established recreation area during its peak use periods or for more 
than 1 year; 

• result in the loss of 10 percent or more of an established or planned recreation site, or 
prevent access to the site, during its peak use periods or for more than 1 year; 

• adversely affect ACECs, wilderness areas, wilderness study areas, or other areas of 
special environmental concern; 

• provide access to previously inaccessible, environmentally sensitive areas; 

• result in reductions in the quality of the recreation experience for more than one visitor 
use season (such as from increased noise and dust, reduced visual quality from landscape 
modifications and night illumination, reduced visibility, and reduced water quality); 

• cause inconsistency with adopted Visual Resource Management (VRM) Plans or local 
ordinances. In those areas where no VRM Plans exist, significant impacts are determined 
by examining the study area for sensitive viewsheds, areas of high user volumes, and 
areas of unique visual resources. Sensitive resources are then examined on a case-by¬ 
case basis to determine level of impact. Significant impacts are those that dominate the 
viewshed from sensitive locations and change the character of the landscape both in 
terms of physical characteristics and land uses; 


4-133 



• result in a substantial adverse effect on a scenic area or vista; 

• substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock 
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic area or highway; 

• substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its 
surroundings; or 

• create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect day or 
nighttime views in the area. 

4.8.2 Land Use and Ownership 

Construction of the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project would disturb approximately 1,745.5 
acres of land, including the pipeline facilities, aboveground facilities, pipe storage and contractor yards, 
and access roads. Approximately 108.7 acres of the 1,745.5 acres used for construction would be 
required for operation of the Project. Of this total, about 102.9 acres would be for the pipeline facilities, 
5.4 acres would be for the aboveground facilities, and 0.4 acre would be for permanent access roads 
associated with the proposed facilities. The remaining 1,636.8 acres of land would be restored and 
allowed to revert to former use. Table 4.8.2-1 summarizes the acres of each land use that would be 
affected by construction and operation of the Project. 

Pipeline Facilities 

The Project would involve the construction of 126.1 miles of pipeline facilities of various 
diameters in La Paz County, Arizona and Riverside and Imperial Counties, California (see Table 2.1.1-1). 
Of the 126.1 miles of proposed pipeline route, approximately 125.4 miles (99 percent) would be 
constructed in or adjacent to various existing rights-of-way (see Table 2.2.1-1). The B-Line and BEI 
Lateral would be entirely in or adjacent to existing rights-of-way. Of the 45.7 miles associated with the 
IID Lateral, 0.7 mile (2 percent) would be constructed on newly created right-of-way that does not 
parallel existing rights-of-way. 

Table 4.8.2-2 lists the land uses that would be crossed by the proposed pipeline facilities. The 
predominant land use that would be crossed is open land, comprising about 80.3 miles (64 percent) of the 
pipeline routes. Anthropogenic (i.e., industrial/commercial/utility) uses are the second most prevalent 
land use, comprising 43.2 miles (34 percent) of the proposed pipeline routes. Other land uses that would 
be crossed by the pipeline facilities include 2.2 miles (2 percent) of agricultural land and 0.4 mile (less 
than 1 percent) of open water. 

Land use impacts associated with the Project would include the disturbance of existing land uses 
within the construction right-of-way during construction and retention of a new permanent right-of-way 
for operation of the pipeline facilities. North Baja proposes to generally use a 105-foot-wide construction 
right-of-way for the B-Line, consisting of North Baja’s existing 50-foot-wide permanent right-of-way and 
55 feet of temporary workspace. In most areas, about 80 feet of the construction right-of-way would 
overlap the previously disturbed right-of-way. The B-Line would be installed within North Baja’s 
existing 50-foot-wide permanent right-of-way using a standard 25-foot offset from the existing A-Line. 
No new permanent right-of-way would be required for operation of the B-Line. 


4-134 


CL 

c 

o 

'(/> 

c 

co 

a 

x 

LU 

a> 

_c 

Ql 

a. 

.2, 

co 

ffl 

n 


a> 


T o 

cm c 

oo 

■3 
LU 


CD 

< 


O 

V-» 

co 

w 

a> 

a 

O 

•a 

c 

<0 

c 

o 

ffl 

k- 

Y-Y 

(0 

c 

o 

o 

>Y 

XJ 

T 3 

a> 

♦Y 

o 

CD 


■a 

c 

co 


(/) 

a> 

h_ 

o 

< 


c 

ffl 

CL 

O 


2 

3 

3 

o 

i_ 

03 

< 


T3 

C 

03 

U 

C 

0) 

CL 

O 


(0 

c 

o 

O 


o 

ffl 

LL 


CO 

un 

co 

co 

0 

co 

03 

co 

co 

in 

in 


CD 

03 

co 



03 

CO 


03 





K 

O 


in T-i co o o -—i n- 

y— dl *** O O dl T ~~ 


O 

03 


ffl 

O 

05 

a. 

« 

>» ^ 
05 O 

£ ^ 

■6 2 
■p X 

£3 w 


to 

T 3 

k_ 

03 
> 
k_ 

O 
o 

03 
CO 

ffl E 
-j ~ o 

CO i= O 
co o 

ffl 05 


eg 

o 

•4—. 

-O 

ffl 


ffl 

c 


CD 


ffl 

c 
ffl 

1 . 9 - 


a) 

c 


03 

k_ 

O 

Q. 

E 

(D 


9 - CL (— 

a. 


o 

ffl 

c 

ffl 


"O 

c 

ffl 

2 

o> 


"O 

c 

03 w 

ffl "2 
03 ra 

to o 
5 * 

CO 


a 

Q 

S 

ffl 


CO 

k_ 

- 9 - E . 9 - 8 s 
i£ < cl < fflJ lu 

CQ CD 


ffl 5) co co 

* 03 ® - 


o 

CO 

LL 

ffl 

C 


>. ^ 
CO o 

5 £ 

■5 S 
X 

cr cT 


co 

co 

CL —- 

co co 


-Q 

ffl 

CO 

to 

ffl 


co 

ffl 


o 

CO 


CO 
T3 
1 _ 

CO 

>- 


o 

CO 

c 

o 

o 

■O 

c 

CO 


U 

Q) 

0 

q| 

0 

p 

O 

P| 

CM 


°| 

rx 

0 

0 


00 

CM 

0 

q 

Yt 

0 

- 


Q. 

d 

0 

C 3 

in 

d 

ol 

d 

d 

ol 

d 

d 

d 

dl 

d 

evi 

0 

CM 

d 

d 

0 

CM 

O 















0 


O 




O 
























p 

CM 

CM 

00 

0 

cm| 

CM 

y 3 

r\ 

>o 

0 

0 


co 

CM 


CO 

03 

h- 

CM 

Y^ 

V 

Yt 

T— 

lO 

CD 

d 

ol 

Cm 

y 3 

ol 

m-' 

d 

d 

ol 


d 

CO 

CO 

C\i 

evi 

d 

03 

Q 

CO 

in 

Cp 




03 








CD 

Y}- 

O 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 




CM 








CO 


Yt 




Yt 


in 

CM 

K 

co 

Yt 

03 | 

00 

y 3 


10 

0 

0 


CO 

CM 


CO 

03 

lY* 

CM 

Y^- 

GO 

in 

00 

CO 

CD 

d 

03 

d 

Yt 

ol 

M" 

d 

d 

dl 


d 

CO 

CO 

CM 

CM 

q 

d 

c 

1 — 

CM 

Yt 


in 

031 

0 








CD 

y 3 

0 


CM 

T— 

Yt 

0 

o_ 


Y-. 




co 








CO 


M- 




Yt 

0 



T— 




Y— 















u 

d) 

0 

0 

O 

0 

0 

o| 

0 

O 

o| 

O 

0 

0 

°| 

0 

0 

q 

q 

O 

O 

q 

q 

Q_ 

0 

d 

d 

d 

d 

d 

ol 

d 

d 

ol 

d 

d 

d 

dl 

d 

d 

0 

O 

d 

d 

0 

O 

CO 

0 

0 

q 

0 

0 

°l 

0 

0 

°| 

0 

0 

0 

q| 

0 

0 

0 

q 

0 

0 

q 

O 

c 

0 

d 

0 

0 

d 

d 

ol 

d 

d 

ol 

d 

d 

d 

ol 

d 

d 

0 

0 

d 

d 


d 

0 






















L 

ffl 

0 

0 

O 

0 

0 

°| 

0 

0 

°| 

C 3 

0 

0 

°| 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

CL 

O 

d 

d 

d 

d 

d 

ol 

d 

d 

ol 

d 

d 

d 

dl 

d 

d 

d 

d 

d 

d 

d 

d 

CO 

p 

N- 

N. 

0 

0 

CO| 

0 

0 

°| 

0 

0 

0 

q| 

0 

p 

i". 

K 

0 

0 

T— 

co 

c 

Q 

06 

Yt 

c\i 

d 

d 

cmI 

d 

d 

ol 

d 

d 

d 

ol 

d 

T-I 

y 3 

d 

d 

d 

CD 

Y— 

O 

CM 

CO 

CO 




CO 










Y«» 




c\j 

ffl 

0 

0 

0 

CM 

0 

o| 

CM 

0 

°l 

0 

0 

0 

o| 

0 

fY- 

O 

K 

CM 

0 

O 

03 

CL 

d 

d 

0 

d 

d 

ol 

d 

d 

ol 

d 

d 

d 

dl 

d 

03 

d 

q 

d 

d 

d 

03 

O 















in 


cn 






t- 

0 

fx 

0 

y 3 

°| 


03 

o| 

03 

0 

0 

q| 

03 

C" 

-3 

q 

m 

|Y- 

q 

q 

w 

r-L 

d 

K 


in 

ol 

Yt 

CM 

ol 

CM 

d 

d 

ol 

evi 

in 

co 

q 

c\i 

CM 



cl 







CO 








y 3 




CM 


rx 

O 

O 



Y«» 




Y— 








CM 


CM 




CM 

U 

CD 

q 

0 

0 

00 

0 

CM| 

O 

1 ^ 

q| 

K 

0 

0 


co 

in 

0 

10 

CM 

0 


CO 

CL 

0 

d 

d 

Yj- 

d 

ol 

d 

d 

ol 

d 

d 

d 

ol 

d 

CM 

d 

CM 

d 

d 

d 

CM 

0 















Yf 






Yt 


in Ol L 0 -o- o col N. 
co in d o d col c\j 

1 - CMl CO Yt 


CO 

■p 

CO 


ffl 

c 


_ o 

03 I 1 ! 0 


CD 


o 

Q. 

E . 

ffl ffl 


ffl 

o 


CL CL I- . 9 . 


■O 
c 

ffl 

o 

k_ 

O) ^ 

ffl CO 

o ® 
jo . 9 - 
< 0 - 


co 
ffl "2 
O) § 

QC 


CO 

CO 

ffl 

o 

o 

< 


a 

2 

-Q 

ffl 

CO 

8 

ffl 

CO 

u] 

CQ 


co 

ffl 


o 

03 

LL 


ffl ffl 


ffl 

ffl 


> 

ffl 


03 

ir 

ffl 

_c 

ffl 

Q. 


Q. CL 


ffl 



> 



O 

ffl 

CL 



u_ 

0 

Y— • 



C/3 

2 


O 



-iC 

Q 


ffl 



O 

5 

-Q 

O 

0) 

c 

0 



ffl 

CD 

V 

0 



k_ 

■4—* 

X 

C/3 

,q> 

0 

as 

T3 

C 


a 

LU 


Li_ 

ffl 

V) 

0 

£■ 

0 

rrr 

~o 

c 

ffl 

03 

~o 

as 

-Q 

O 

2 

0 

Q. 

»2 

03 

3 

2 

O) 

ffl 

k_ 

O 

0 

CC 

c/) 

CQ 

8 

E 

as 

t- 

.c 

ffl 

. 9 . 

(D 

> 

O 

-Q 

w 

ffl 

9 . 

V) 

0 

0 

0 

03 

■4—• 
CX3 
—1 


CL < CL < 


4-135 












TABLE 4.8.2-1 (cont’d) 

Acres of Land Affected by Construction and Operation of the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project _ 

_ Open Land 3 _ Anthropogenic b _ Agriculture 0 _ Open Water d _ Total 

New 


o 


CD 

CL 

O 


0 

c 

o 

O 


u 

( 1 ) 

05 

0 

05 


0 


r*. 

CL 

cvj 

d 

Cvj 

crj 

d 

ol 

aj 

O 

O 


O 




O 










CO 


q 

N; 

|x. 

LO 

O) 

CO 

06 

£ 

co 

05 

c\j 

d 

ud 

Q 

05 

05 

05 


CM 


CM 

IO 


CO 




(s- 



■Sf 

If) 

r- 

y — 

CM 

LO 

to 

d 

yC 


O) 

CO 

Y- 

If) 

c 

CO 


If) 


t"- 

T— 


0 

CO 

y — 

If) 



T— 

fs._ 

0 

T_ 


y — 





CD 

0 

O 

O 

O 

0 

O 

q 

Q. 

d 

d 

d 

d 

d 

d 

0 

O 








to 

0 

0 

1 0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

c 

0 

d 

0 

d 

d 

d 

d 

d 


o 01 o o o 01 o 

o ol o o o ol o 


q 


m- 

O 

0 


00 

05 

d 

d 

d 

d 

col 

CD 

CM 


K 




CO 


(0 

-t—» 

o 

-4—> 

.Q 
3 
C/) 

■4—* 

o 

2 o. 
0. 


o 

CO 

LL 

o 

c 


CD 

o 

CO 

Q. 

0 

CO o 

<: 5 

•5 2 

£ x 

% w 

ir I* 


i 2 

o 

■*— 

3 


co 
~o 

03 

> 


o 

03 


CO 


co .9 


0 ~ 

Q. CL 


O 

CL 

E 

CD 


co 

0 


o 

.2 

CD 

C 


c 

_ o 

= o 


o 

CO 

LL 

-o 

c 

o 


■a 

c 

CO (/) 

CD ‘O — 
CD CO 0 

S <2 2 


1 S 1 co 8 

§ 8. 8 
.a .9- 0 
< a. < 


.9. 

0 . 


o 

CD 

o 

J— 

CL 


CO 

o 

L_ 

CD 

E 

E 

o 

.0 

0 

L. 

to 

3 

•o 

_c 

k_ 

<d 

£ 

o 

■O 

c 

03 

CO 

U) 

c 

'co 

CO 

o 

o 

"O 

03 

o 

CO 

03 

a 

<: 

CO 

03 

to 

>4 

03 

<: 

*o 

03 

o 

k. 

>. 

Y—' 

c 

3 

o 

o 

0 

'k. 

© 

Q. 

E 


k_! 









■O 

CD 

CL 


Ol 



0 

o 

Y- 


c 

03 

O 

d 

ol 

oj 

d 

d 

d 

d 


CD 


in 


co 




co 


3 









CO 

C 









~o 

CD 









c 

> 









J« 

< 

to 

co 

"T 

K 

in 

Y-_ 

q 1 

CD 

a) 

-C 

*C0 

c 

/—v 

d 

COi 

O) 

cd 

ad 


CM 



LJ 

CO 


CO 


CD 


vj- 

~o 


O 

CO 


CO 




•M- 

c 

03 

q> 










aj^ 









CO 










■0 

CO 









c 

> 

iJ 








j5 

03 

CD 

Q. 

C\J 

0 

CM 

q 

O 

■Yt 

q 


5 

T3 

O 

CO 

d 

cd 

ud 

d 

d 

ad 

_ j 

L— 

03 




■'fr 




Yt 

_c 

O 









CO 

L_ 









_Q 

3 

L_ 

~o 
a) 
> 









O 

03 


CO 

CO 

M- 

CM 

q 

in 

Y— 

CO 

Q. 

CO 

c 

d 

cd 

cd 

CD 

ud 

y— 

CD 

■c 

C 

13 

0 

CO 

.— 

0 



O 

Y— 

CD 


0 

o> 






OJ 

CO 

CD 

O 




Y. 




T- 

“O 

T3 


■O 

CD 

Q. 

o 

CD 

> 

CD 

■0 

c 

co 

CD 

-O 

_3 

o 

c 

■O 

c 

0 

c 

0 

a. 

o 


■O 

0 

0 

0 

o 

o 

0 

JD 

32 

3 

o 

5 

co 

0 

C/5 TD 

9- 0 
p -p 


o 

o 

3 

0 

JC 

0 

0 

05 

0 

> 


c 

0 

x 

0 

0 

0 

0 

jd 

0 

o 

Y—» 

~0 

c 

0 

0 

3 

0 

0 

CL 

■o 

0 

0 

O) 


•o 

c 

0 

c 

o 

c 

o 

o 


0 

0 

5 

0 

0 

0 


0 

0 

3 

0 

O 

0 

CD 

0 

05 

c 

'0 

0 t 3 

o ® 

O o' 

0 ol 

s ® 

o £ 

0 *5 

Z o 

O) V-* 

x 2 

0 

CL 

o 


■O 

c 

0 _ 
o 
c c 
0 .9 
O o 

c 5 
0 
o 


0 


0 - < 
0 


5 

£ 

£ 

0 


0 

> 

0 

CL 

0 

0 

-O 

_3 

O 

■O 

c 

0 

o 

‘c 

0 

05 

o 

a. 

o 


o 

0 

•*—> 

CO 

'co 

c 

o 

o 


03 

o 

'o. 

> 


o 

JZ 

£ 

t5 

c 

03 

Q. 

o 
\ — 
o 

CO 

a> 

~o 

J3 

o 

c 

“D 

c 

05 

"a5 


CO 

c 
o 
o 
> 
-Q 

"O 
0 

kC o 
0 0 
> 3= 

ir ® 
O j§ 

1 §T> 

|1 

0 0 

£ 0 

0 ^ 
CO C 
.c 
o 


3 

o 

1 _ 

05 

< 


0 
CL 

5 o 

0 o 
0 c _ 
0 "O 

£ J 

o 0 

0 E 
0 _ 

0 = 

0 -o 

X « 

® o 

C 

cd o 
cl 2 

s* 

1! 

77 o 

£ £ 
1 _ o 
0 

0 0 
$ £ 
C 05 

0 c 


c 

o 

o 
3 
•*—» 
0 
c 
o 
O 


0 

c 

o 

O 


< 

0 


o 

c 

o 

• 4 —> 

o 

3 

k— 

0 

c 

o 

o 


05 

c 

d 

c 

3 

o 


0 

3 

-o 

0 

■O 

c 

0 

■O 

-O 

0 

o 

E 

3 

0 


05 0 


3 

"O 

•O 

0 

3 
-+-* 

0 

o 
c 

JD 

0 0 


0 

1 c 


0 

3 

O" 

0 

O 

c 

>» 

0 

E 

© 


c 

o 

0 

L_ 

0 

CL 

o 


0 

o 

c 

0 

3 

0 

T> 

§ 


C 

§ 

o 

-C 

0 

0 


0 0 
o 


II 


0 
5 
0 5 

Q. 0 

O Z 


0 


0 

o 


4-136 













TABLE 4.8.2-2 


Land Uses Crossed by the Pipeline Facilities Associated with the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project (miles) 

Facility 

Open Land a 

Anthropogenic Land b 

Agricultural Land c 

Open Water d 

Total 

B-Line 

68.3 

9.1 

2.2 

0.3 

79.8 

BEI Lateral 

0.3 

0.3 

0.0 

0.0 

0.6 

IID Lateral 

11.8 

33.8 

0.0 

0.1 

45.7 

Project Total 

80.3 

43.2 

2.2 

0.4 

126.1 


(64%) 

(34%) 

(2%) 

(<1%) 

(100%) 


Open land includes undeveloped, desert scrub-shrub lands, and wetlands. 

Anthropogenic land includes paved or unpaved roadways (e.g., 18 th Avenue and Imperial County roadways) as well as 
road crossings and other industrial/commercial/utility uses. 

Agricultural land includes cropland, which typically consists of alfalfa, wheat, cotton, and irrigated pasture, and, to a lesser 
extent, vegetable truck crops. 

Open water includes open expanses of water such as the Colorado River, All-American Canal, and Highline Canal 
crossings. Because these waterbodies would be crossed using the horizontal directional drill method, no open water 
would be affected by construction or operation of the Project. 

Note: The totals shown in this table may not equal the sum of addends due to rounding. 


Where the B-Line would be installed within or abutting the paved portion of 18th Avenue (a 
distance of about 7.6 miles), rights to build and operate the pipeline within the county road right-of-way 
would be authorized under a franchise agreement with Riverside County. Franchise agreements do not 
typically grant a specific strip of land, but simply allow the pipeline to be installed and operated within 
the road right-of-way. North Baja proposes to use a 60-foot-wide construction right-of-way to install the 
B-Line in the paved portion of 18 th Avenue. 

North Baja proposes to generally use a 60-foot-wide construction right-of-way for the BEI 
Lateral. The permanent right-of-way between the Blythe Meter Station and Riviera Drive (MPs 0.0 to 
0.3) would be 30 feet wide. Rights to build and operate the lateral within the Riviera Drive right-of-way 
(MPs 0.3 to 0.6) would be authorized under an agreement between North Baja and the City of Blythe. 
For the purpose of this analysis, a 1-foot-wide permanent right-of-way has been assumed for the portion 
of the BEI Lateral located within Riviera Drive. 

Where the IID Lateral parallels existing electric transmission lines, North Baja proposes to 
generally use an 80-foot-wide construction right-of-way and a 30-foot-wide permanent right-of-way. 
North Baja proposes to use a 60-foot-wide construction right-of-way and a 30-foot-wide permanent right- 
of-way where the lateral would be installed between a transmission line and a road. A 60-foot-wide 
construction right-of-way would also be used where the IID Lateral would be installed within or abutting 
the traveled portion of county roads. Rights to build and operate the IID Lateral within county road 
rights-of-way would be authorized under a franchise agreement between North Baja and Imperial County. 
Franchise agreements do not typically grant a specific strip of land, but simply allow the pipeline to be 
installed and operated within the road right-of-way. For the portion of the IID Lateral located in Evan 
Hewes Highway and other county roads, a 2-foot-wide permanent right-of-way has been assumed. In 
some cases, where the road right-of-way has not been expressly dedicated to the county, North Baja may 
acquire additional easements from private landowners. In these areas, a 30-foot-wide permanent right-of- 
way has been assumed. 

Comments were received during the scoping process expressing concern that there is not enough 
room in the easements of Imperial County roadways for a pipeline. North Baja selected the proposed 
route in Imperial County roadways based, in part, on a field reconnaissance survey to identify roads with 
fewer existing surface and buried utilities as well as consultation with the Imperial County Department of 


4-137 






Public Works. Few obstacles were identified or noted that would prevent placement of a pipeline in the 
road easements. Where such constraints were identified (e.g., the Holtville-Orchard Road Overpass of 
Hunt Road), North Baja adjusted the proposed route to move outside the road right-of-way for a short 
distance. 

In addition to the construction right-of-way, North Baja has identified temporary extra 
workspaces that would be required for staging areas and construction at waterbodies, roads, and railroads, 
and in areas of steep slopes and rugged terrain. The approximate locations and sizes of temporary extra 
workspaces identified by North Baja are listed in Table D-l in Appendix D. 

Construction of the pipeline facilities would affect a total of about 1,551.5 acres of land, 
including 1,380.1 acres for the pipeline rights-of-way and 171.4 acres for temporary extra workspace. 
About 858.5 acres or 55 percent is previously disturbed area associated with construction and operation of 
North Baja’s existing A-Line. Open land would be the primary land use affected by construction of the 
pipeline facilities totaling about 1,103.4 acres (71 percent) (see Table 4.8.2-1). The remaining land uses 
that would be disturbed consist of 369.7 acres (24 percent) of anthropogenic land and 78.4 acres (5 
percent) of agricultural land. No open water would be affected by construction of the pipeline facilities 
because open expanses of water such as the Colorado River, All-American Canal, and Highline Canal 
would be crossed using the HDD method (see Section 2.3.2). 

Of the 1,551.5 acres of land that would be affected by construction of the pipeline facilities, about 
102.9 acres would be retained as new permanent right-of-way. Of the 102.9 acres permanently retained, 
59.7 acres (58 percent) are anthropogenic land and 43.2 acres (42 percent) are open land. The land 
retained as permanent right-of-way would be allowed to revert to former use; however, tree crops such as 
orchards and aboveground structures would be prohibited on the permanent right-of-way. There are no 
restrictions on how close structures (e.g., houses) can be to the permanent pipeline right-of-way. The 
remaining 1,448.6 acres used for temporary construction right-of-way and temporary extra workspace 
would be allowed to revert to prior uses following construction with no restrictions. 

The most valuable crops in the Project area include alfalfa in La Paz County, nursery stock in 
Riverside County, and vegetables and melons in Imperial County. No agricultural land would be affected 
by operation of the proposed pipeline facilities. Therefore, the Project would not result in the conversion 
of more than 1 percent of agricultural lands to a non-agricultural use or impair the productivity of more 
than 1 percent of agricultural land in a county. The Project would also not result in the loss of more than 
1 percent of the acreage planted in a county’s most valuable crop. 

Construction and operation activities on approximately 90 percent of the lands affected by the 
Project would be authorized by various governmental entities including: the BLM (for Federal lands 
managed by the BLM, the BOR, and the FWS [53 percent]), California counties (36 percent), the States 
of Arizona or California or cities (less than 1 percent), or the CSLC (less than 1 percent). The remainder 
of the land that would be affected (10 percent) is privately owned. Table 4.8.2-3 summarizes the land 
ownership along the proposed pipeline facilities. 

An easement would be used to convey both temporary (for construction) and permanent rights-of- 
way to North Baja. The easement gives the company the right to construct, operate, and maintain the 
pipelines, and establish a permanent right-of-way. In return, the company compensates the landowner for 
use of the land. The easement agreement between the company and the landowner typically specifies 
compensation for loss of use during construction, loss of nonrenewable or other resources, damage to 
property during construction, and allowable uses of the permanent right-of-way after construction. 


4-138 


TABLE 4.8.2-3 


Summary of Land Ownership Crossed by the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project (miles) 


Facility 

Federal a 

County 

Private 

CSLC 

Other (State or City) 

Total 

B-Line 

59.3 

8.2 

11.7 

0.2 

0.4 

79.8 

BEI Lateral 

0.0 

0.3 

0.3 

0.0 

0.0 

0.6 

IID Lateral 

8.1 

36.5 b 

0.7 

0.0 

0.4 

45.7 

Project Total 

67.4 

45.0 

12.7 

0.2 

0.8 

126.1 


(53%) 

(36%) 

(10%) 

(<1%) 

(<1%) 

(100%) 


Lands authorized by the BLM, including lands managed by the BLM, BOR, and the FWS. The BLM would issue a 
Right-of-Way Grant that would apply to all affected Federal lands after receipt of concurrence from the BOR and the 
FWS. 

Of this total, about 17.6 miles would be located within county road rights-of-way across BLM land. 

Note: The totals shown in this table may not equal the sum of addends due to rounding. 


If an easement cannot be negotiated with a landowner and the Project has been certificated by the 
FERC, North Baja may use the right of eminent domain granted to it under section 7(h) of the NGA and 
the procedures set forth under the Federal Rules of Civic Procedure (Rule 71 A) to obtain the right-of-way 
and temporary extra workspace areas. North Baja would still be required to compensate the landowner 
for the right-of-way and damages incurred during construction. However, the level of compensation 
would be determined by a court according to State or Federal law. In either case, North Baja would 
compensate landowners for use of the land. Eminent domain does not apply to lands under Federal 
ownership (i.e., BLM, BOR, and FWS land). 

Aboveground Facilities 

Modifications at existing and construction of new aboveground facilities associated with the 
proposed Project would affect 9.7 acres of land. Of the 9.7 acres, 5.4 acres would be permanently 
converted for operation of these facilities. Table 4.8.2-4 summarizes the land requirements and land use 
for the aboveground facilities associated with the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project. 

The installation of a new pig receiver at the Ehrenberg Compressor Station would take place 
within the existing fenceline of the facility and would not require any additional land for construction or 
operation; however, a header pipe associated with the new pig receiver would be outside of the fenceline 
of the facility and would require 0.7 acre of anthropogenic land for construction (no permanent right-of- 
way would be required because the line would be installed on North Baja fee property). The aboveground 
modifications at the Ehrenberg Compressor Station and the adjacent El Paso Meter Station to allow for 
northbound flow of gas would take place within the existing fencelines of the facilities. 

North Baja would require about 4.3 acres of privately owned open land for construction and 
operation of the proposed Blythe Meter Station. The addition of a pig launcher and receiver at Rannells 
Trap would require an expansion of the facility by 0.3 acre on private land during both construction and 
operation. The modifications, odorant facility, and additional pig launcher and receiver at the Ogilby 
Meter Station would require an expansion of the facility by 0.4 acre for both construction and operation. 
This expansion would affect anthropogenic land managed by the BLM. 


4-139 






TABLE 4.8.2-4 


Aboveground Facilities Associated with the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 


Facility 

Approximate 

Milepost 

Existing Land Use 

Land Affected 
During Construction 
(acres) 

Land Affected 
During Operation 
(acres) 

B-Line 

Ehrenberg Compressor Station 
Modifications and Pig Receiver a 

0.0 

Anthropogenic (Industrial/ 
Commercial/Utility) 

0.7 

0.0 

El Paso Meter Station 

Modifications a 

0.0 

Anthropogenic (Industrial/ 
Commercial/Utility) 

0.0 

0.0 

Blythe Meter Station 

0.5 

Open Land 

4.3 

4.3 

Rannells Trap Pig Launcher and 

11.7 

Open Land 

0.3 

0.3 

Receiver 

Valve #1 b 

0.0 

Anthropogenic (Industrial/ 
Commercial/Utility) 

0.0 

0.0 

Valve #2 

5.7 

Anthropogenic (Industrial/ 
Commercial/Utility) 

0.3 

0.01 

Valve #3 c 

11.7 

Open Land 

0.0 

0.0 

Valve #4 0 

11.7 

Open Land 

0.0 

0.0 

Valve #5 

28.0 

Open Land 

0.3 

0.0 

Valve #6 

41.6 

Open Land 

0.3 

0.0 

Valve #7 

60.3 

Open Land 

0.3 

0.0 

Valve #8 d 

75.2 

Anthropogenic (Industrial/ 
Commercial/Utility) 

0.0 

0.0 

Valve #9 d 

75.2 

Anthropogenic (Industrial/ 
Commercial/Utility) 

0.0 

0.0 

Ogilby Meter Station 

Modifications, Odorant Facility, 

75.2 

Anthropogenic (Industrial/ 
Commercial/Utility) 

0.4 

0.4 

and Pig Launcher and Receiver 

B-Line Subtotal 



6.8 

5.0 

IID Lateral 

Tap at B-Line and Pig Launcher 

0.0 

Open Land 

0.2 

0.2 

Valve #1 e 

0.0 

Open Land 

0.0 

0.0 

Valve #2 

7.6 

Open Land 

<0.1 

0.0 

Valve #3 

27.2 

Open Land 

<0.1 

0.0 

Valve #4 

38.7 

Agricultural 

<0.1 

0.0 

El Centro Meter Station and Pig 
Receiver 

IID Lateral Subtotal 

Project Total 

45.7 

Anthropogenic (Industrial/ 
Commercial/Utility) 

2.5 

2.9 

9.7 

0.2 

0.4 

5.4 


Modifications at the Ehrenberg Compressor Station and the adjacent El Paso Meter Station would take place within 
the existing fencelines of these facilities; however, a header pipe associated with the new pig receiver would be 
outside of the fenceline of the facility and would require 0.7 acre for construction. 

This facility would be collocated with the Ehrenberg Compressor Station and would not require any additional land 
during construction and operation. 

This facility would be collocated with Rannells Trap and would not require any additional land during construction and 
operation. 

This facility would be collocated with the Ogilby Meter Station and would not require any additional land during 
construction and operation. 

This facility would be collocated with the tap at the B-Line and would not require any additional land during 
construction and operation. 

Note: The totals shown in this table may not equal the sum of addends due to rounding. 


4-140 





Four new valves associated with the B-Line would be collocated with existing valves along the 
A-Line and would require an expansion of the existing 50-foot by 50-foot sites to 75-foot by 150-foot 
sites during construction. A total of about 1.0 acre of open and anthropogenic land would be affected by 
construction of these facilities. No new permanent right-of-way would be required for the new valves, 
except for valve #2 along 18th Avenue. This valve would require a 12-foot by 24-foot expansion of the 
existing fenced site, which would affect privately owned anthropogenic land. The other five valves 
would be within the sites of the Ehrenberg Compressor Station, Rannells Trap, and Ogilby Meter Station 
and would not require any additional land for construction or operation. 

The tap at the B-Line and pig launcher for the IID Lateral would require an 80-foot by 100-foot 
site on BLM land for construction and operation. A total of 0.2 acre of open land would be required for 
construction and operation of these facilities. The proposed El Centro Meter Station and pig receiver 
would be installed within the existing fenceline of the El Centro Power Generating Station but would 
require 2.5 acres of anthropogenic land for construction and would also require North Baja to obtain a 
0.2-acre easement from the IID within the generating station yard. One of the four new valves would be 
collocated with the tap at the B-Line and pig launcher and would not require any additional land for 
construction or operation. The three remaining valves along the IID Lateral would each require 10-foot 
by 25-foot fenced sites within North Baja’s permanent right-of-way. Two of these valves would be on 
open land and the third would be on agricultural land (see Table 4.8.2-4). Valve #4 would permanently 
affect less than 0.1 acre of agricultural land. Because this permanent conversion of agricultural land 
represents less than 1 percent of the agricultural land in Imperial County, impacts associated with this 
conversion would be less than significant. 

Pipe Storage and Contractor Yards 

To support construction activities, North Baja proposes to use four pipe storage and contractor 
yards on a temporary basis. These yards would temporarily affect about 73.1 acres of land consisting of 
about 68.1 acres of anthropogenic (i.e. industrial/commercial/utility) land and 5.0 acres of open land. 

Access Roads 

North Baja proposes to use several existing roads for temporary right-of-way access during 
construction. These access roads are primarily paved or dirt roads and/or jeep trails that would be graded 
or otherwise improved as needed to move equipment and materials to the construction right-of-way. An 
additional 1,150 feet of new temporary access roads would be required for the Project, of which about 
265 feet would be retained as permanent access to the proposed Blythe Meter Station, 400 feet would be 
retained as permanent access to the modified Ogilby Meter Station and odorant facility, and 160 feet 
would be retained as permanent access to the proposed tap at the B-Line and pig launcher at the beginning 
of the IID Lateral. A permanent access road would also be required to proposed valve #2 at MP 7.6 of the 
IID Lateral, but North Baja would utilize existing roads with some modification and would not need to 
construct a new road. A total of about 111.2 acres of land would be affected by using these access roads 
during construction (101.5 acres of open land, 8.4 acres of agricultural land, and 1.3 acres of 
anthropogenic land). Of the 111.2 acres, about 0.4 acre would be required for operation of the permanent 
access roads to the Blythe Meter Station, modified Ogilby Meter Station and odorant facility, and 
proposed tap at the B-Line and pig launcher at the beginning of the IID Lateral. The locations, 
conditions, lengths, and acres of the proposed access roads are listed in Table D-2 in Appendix D. 

4.8.3 Existing Residences and Planned Developments 

4.8.3.1 Existing Residences 

Although no residential land would be directly crossed by the proposed pipeline facilities, the 
adjacent land uses along 18 th Avenue on the B-Line, Riviera Drive on the BEI Lateral, and Imperial 
County roads on the IID Lateral include a mix of rural residential and agricultural land. A total of 24 


4-141 


residences and 2 businesses are along the portion of 18 th Avenue that would be affected by construction of 
the Project. Of the 24 residences, 18 would be within 100 feet of North Baja’s proposed construction 
work area (i.e., construction right-of-way and temporary extra work areas). Both of the businesses along 
18 th Avenue would also be within 100 feet of the proposed construction work area. Two permanent 
residences would be within 100 feet of the proposed construction work area associated with the BEI 
Lateral. Approximately 12 to 15 trailers are also parked within 100 feet of the BEI Lateral construction 
work area, but the actual number varies seasonally. Along the roadways in Imperial County that would 
be affected by the proposed IID Lateral, a total of 28 residences and 6 businesses are present. Of these 
structures, 19 residences and 4 businesses would be within 100 feet of North Baja’s proposed 
construction work area. Table 4.8.3-1 lists the residences within 100 feet of North Baja’s proposed 
construction work area by milepost and indicates the distance and orientation of each from the 
construction work area. There are no residences within 100 feet of the modified or proposed 
aboveground facilities. 

In residential areas, the two most significant impacts associated with construction and operation 
of a pipeline are disturbance during construction and encumbrance of property for future uses caused by 
the easement. This includes the limitation on future permanent structures within the permanent right-of- 
way. The residences and businesses within 100 feet of the construction work area may experience the 
effects of construction and operation of the Project. In general, as the distance from the construction 
work area increases, the impacts on residences decrease. No permanent residences or businesses would 
be displaced from their established locations as a result of the Project. 

Temporary construction impacts on residential areas could include inconvenience caused by noise 
and dust generated by construction equipment, personnel, and trenching of roads or driveways; ground 
disturbance of lawns; removal of trees, landscaped shrubs, or other vegetative screening between 
residences and/or adjacent rights-of-way; potential damage to existing septic systems or wells; disruption 
of access to the property; and removal of aboveground structures, such as fences, sheds, or trailers, from 
within the right-of-way. 

Although two residences along the BEI Lateral would be within 100 feet of the construction work 
area, the pipeline in this area would be installed within Riviera Drive. Fences or walls, some lined with 
shrubbery, separate Riviera Drive from the residential/trailer park area to the east. North Baja would keep 
all construction activities west of the fence and would not disturb the fence or any of the associated shrubs 
along the fence. As a result, the residences east of the fence would not be affected by construction or 
operation of the BEI Lateral. North Baja would ensure that access to and from residences along Riviera 
Drive is maintained during construction. 

In general, construction in the 7.6-mile-long paved segment of 18 th Avenue in Riverside County 
and in the various Imperial County roadways would be accomplished using urban construction 
techniques. All construction activities would be confined to the width of the roadways, including the 
paved roadway and road shoulders. Excavated materials would be used as a temporary road base for 
construction traffic to reduce wear on the existing road surface. Through traffic would be routed around 
segments of road where construction is active; however, North Baja would maintain access to residents, 
farm workers, and emergency response vehicles throughout the period of construction (estimated to be 
about 2 weeks in any given location). North Baja has developed Traffic Management Plans for 18 th 
Avenue and Imperial County Roads (see Appendix H). These plans are discussed in further detail in 
Section 4.10.2. 


4-142 


CO 

°o 

rj- 

UJ 

_l 

m 

< 


CL 

C 

o 

■« 

c 

TO 

CL 

X 

LD 

0 ) 

© 

a 

a. 

_co 

03 

CO 

£ 


a> 

X 


X 

© 

+- 

TO 

O 

o 

</) 

w 

< 

ro 

v 

k_ 

< 


c 
o 
’*—* 
o 
3 

i_ 

(A 

C 

o 

o 

a> 


o 

o 


CO 

05 


x 

a> 

w 

o 

Q. 

O 

L_ 

a. 

to 

'© 

CO 

m 

x 

x 

o 


X 

© 

O 

Q) 

< 

_>< 

© 

C 

© 

o 

Q. 

t/5 

© 
i_ 

n 

4 —* 

ro 

© 


o 

© 

CL E 
CO © 

jj? 
CO © 


©■2 


c © 

x of 
— © < 

E ~ 

n » >: 

2 c o 

— ° ^ 
O > 


cn 

3? o 

— CL 
o © 
© = 


X 

© 

Q. 

o 

o 

w 

x 

w x 
c ® 

5 ^ 
Sg 

Q. CL 

2 E 
. © 

© = 
5 2 

© CO 

> c 


c 

o 

4-» 

o 

3 

(n 
c 
o 
o 

0 

g. 

Q- 

a> 

> 

o 

-4—■ 

c/5 

© 

c/5 

© 

> 

© 

$ 

© 

> 


2 8 
o >2 

8 I 

3 o 


© q5 

q. -s; 

Q) CD 

CE E 


> 
© 
4_ 

co 

co 

© 

© 

o 

o 

© 

c 

§ 

© 


5 T3 


© 
© 

g- 
'© c 

O.X 

© o 
© 


© 

c 

© 

o 

9 

> 


g £2 
© 
o 


q 

> 

CL 


© '- L 

= 1 
© to 

to •£= 

■S «* 

>4$ 
CD C. 

5 


© 

to 3 
to °- 

•— © 

?1 
© .5 

.8 52 
© © 

w o 

-4-^ 

c o 
_CD © 
CL O 

2 a. 
^2 

5 o) 
> c 


© 

to 

Q. 

© 

to 

c 

x“ 

o 

-Q 

to 

E 

© 

o 

© 

CL 

© 

L_ 

> 

i 


© 

© 

CL 

to 

4 —* 

C/5 

c 

x' 

o 

-Q 

to 

E 

© 

o 

© 

CL 

© 

k_ 

>4 

i 


oc 3 i- i- 


>* 

>! 

§•5 

1Z 


?c 


L_ 

CD 

L_ 

E a 

-o 3 

o 

c 

2 

■= ^ 

•C O 

E I 


o 

~ o 
© © 

k- k_ 


CL 

© ,® 


© 7* 

© ~ 


E 

CD 

CL -X 
2 2 

CL t 

3 © 

© 

> 



< 

1 - 

CE CL 

CE n 

o 

CE O 

CE o 

2 


c 

5 

ro 

c 

JO CD 
CL CL 
© Q. 

4 
E 2 

— CO 
® © 

E © 

© . 

© o ® 

© | .g - 
5f|l 

s 2i 

111 

P © to 

■ ■ c 

o 
o 


© 

© 


CL 
© CO 

cn .5 


© 

>_ © 
© cr 

2 o jj 
c | S 

its 

r 2 © 
o»E 

fc — to 

© c £ 
x > o 
_ > o 
© 2 <]) 

to H .9- 

.g © 9 - 

- CL © 

© 2 o 

| « 
> © © 

Iss 

■| © o 

2 2 © 
CC Q_ 


0 ) 

X> 

3 

L. 

x: 

CO 

c © 

© .9- 

q-9- 
© © 

*- > 

©' 2 

o C/5 

I s 

»= 

© ■§ © 

g-sf 

w ~ s 

>> © o 

is® 
>2 i 
*41 


--4 ^ 

2 . 2 - 
o) 9- 
c © 

8 I 

_© CO 

w. © 
© CO 

E 3 

© C 

^ i 

^2 


© 


© w 


CLXi 
© CO 5 

CE .£ 8 


w 

© © 
o 
o 
© 


>4 

© 

© 

> 


CO 

CO 


o 

o 

C\J 

"'3’ 


c 
o 

to 

O) © 

t 5 
- © 
5 > 

a o 


CNJ 

o 


CO 

CO 

LLJ 

I 

o 

o 

CM 

■'3’ 


V) 

© 

© 


© 

CL 


V) cn 
cn cn 


© 
o o 


>> 
© 

© © 


cn 

cn 

© 

o 

o 

© 

CO 

XI 

3 

L_ 

-C 

cn 

>, 

© 

© 

> 


o 

< 


CO 

o 


o 

< 


■'3' 

O 


X 

o 

n 

to 

E 

>4 

© 

© 

> 


X 

o 

to 

E 

5^ 

© 

5 

© 

> 


c 

o 




c 








c 


_CD 

(/) 





-Q 


_© 


c n 

3 




0) 



x" 


Q) 

0) 


o 



» 


X 



CD 




E 

O 


to 


© 

CL 

c 


E 


0 




> 

> 


© 

(0 

(0 

0 

O 

© „ 

CD 


© 

> 

> cn 

® © 

> o 

£ 

0 

> 

c/) 
0) 
0 
o 


o 

i- o 

a u 

o 

Q 

CD 

O © 

Q 

0 


LU LU LU 


O 

O 


O 

O 


■sf 'O’ 


lO 

CO 

1^- 

CO 

O 

CM 

CO 

o 

o 

O 

o 

T— 

4 - 

4- 

■4 

■4 

4 

4 

4T- 

4- 

4- 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

co 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

LU 

LU 

LLJ 

LLJ 

LU 

LLJ 

UJ 

o 

O 

6 

O 

6 

6 

6 

o 

O 

o 

O 

o 

o 

o 

CM 

CM 

CM 

CM 

CM 

CM 

CM 

^3" 

■O’ 

-3- 

^3" 

43- 

43- 

•M - 


CO 

CO 

LLJ 

I 

o 

o 

CM 

•M" 


>“ © 

i " 

| g 

Is 

•s 8 

Q- -S 
© 2 
a: cl 


c 

§ 

© 

w' 

© 

© 

cn 
co 
© 
o 
o 
© 


© 

CL 


>>■© 
© © 

© -C 
> 

■c CO 

rt P 


co 


CO 

CO 

LLJ 

I 

o 

o 

CM 


X 

£ 

X X x 

X 

X 

X 

jC 

X 

X 

X 

x: 

tr 

3 

3 3 X 

X 

X 

X 

3 

X 

X 

X 

3 

o 

O 

O O O 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

O 

z 

CO 

CO CO z 

z 

z 

z 

CO 

z 

z 

z 

CO 


© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

c 

stance fr 
Edge ol 
onstructi 
rk Area ( 














■« 

—1 

Q O o 


^_ 

o> 

to 

CO 

CM 

CO 

CM 

o 

CD 


O 

CO 

— > 
CD 

CO 

LO 


r- 

00 

CO 

00 


CD 


05 

43 - 


■O 















c 















© 















© 

© 

® © 
g © 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 


© 

© 

© 

E © 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

O 

o 

o 

o 

U ) 

O 

0 

0 


© c 

c 

c 

c 

c 

c 

c 

c 

c 

c 

0 

c 

c 

c 

© 

-T-J 

S « 

© 3 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

0 

© 

© 

© 

T3 

T3 

TO 

33 

33 

X 

X 

X 

X 


X 

X 

X 

V 

2 CD 

‘w 

cn 

'cn 

cn 

’© 

'© 

'© 

'cn 

'cn 

*0 

'cn 

‘w 

'cn 

’© 

CE 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

3 

© 

© 

© 

© 

CE 


CE 

CE 

CE 

CE 

CE 

CE 

CE 

CE 

CE 

CD 

cr 

CE 

cr 


CM 

O 

CM 

43 - 

CM 

10 



CM 

CO 

CVJ 


CO 

05 

CO 

CO 

CD 



1^ 

°0 

05 

CM 


CO 

05 

CM 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 




43 - 


CD 


4-143 


construction technique 

5.25 Business 49 North 4200-E-SS-116 Driveway, access Repair driveway, install plate over trench 

5.72 Residence 84 South 4200-E-SS-117 Driveway, lawn Repair driveway, replant lawn 

6.38 Residence 52 North 4200-E-SS-120 Driveway, lawn Repair driveway, replant lawn, install plate over 

trench, use stove-pipe construction technique 





Residences and Businesses Within 100 Feet of the Construction Work Area Associated with the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 


0 

w 

CO 

CD 


CO 

O) 


T3 

CD 

CO 

O 

Q. 

O 

CL 

co 

‘cO 

CO 

CO 

-£T 

tr 

o 


TO 

0 

o 

0 

< 

_>k 

to 

c 

CD 

O 

CL 

t/T 

£ 

to 

CD 

LL 


O Zi, 

O 1 
<D -£ 
CL E 
CO 0 

2 z 

in § 

CL 


5 o co 
O 0 ~ CD 
~ £ cd S 

c E ~ -* 

•c 2 c o 

o^cS^ 


2 c ® 

g ^ o 5 

§ i,I I 

£ T3 W < 
5 LU C _ 

co O tt 

rr Op 


o ® 
® CO 
C Q) 

® c 
— co 

CO 3 

0 m 

CE 


c 

o 

o 

. 

to 

c 

o 

o 

CD 

g_ 

'a. 

■ 

CD 

> 

O 


CD 

CO 

3 


■a 

CD 

St 

g>o 

.£ o 

o CO 
CD £0 

tl 2= 

<D CO 
'? W 


CO 


n *- 


CD 

3 

cr 

'c 

_ JO 
o T3 O 
tl CD © 
02 := 

C Q. C 

Mo 2 

CD Q o 
^ to 2 

© « to 
•C j= C 
- co Q 


o 

c 


jo d 
= z: 
CO ® 


CO 


. o 


_C0 CD 

0 

c cr 

« c 

Q.-C 

CD o 
DC ® 


(O c ® 
.£ w co 
<0-0. 
S' CD _ 

lli 

© g w 

> g.E 


— o ® 

to ■§ .9- 
to ^ 9- 
.Em® 
o 

5 CO ® 

® 8 § 

CD - 


CD CD 

k_ k_ 

+—• 

0 0 
> > 
o o 
0 ® 
tts JS 

Q. Q. 


.c 

o 

c 

0 


0 

> 

o 

0 

to 

Q. 


•dm3 


00 


to — to 

. 4 ^ TO 

~ o -C 

(0 o 0 

§■ o to 
IX CL E 


4 - « 

•= o c 

co 0 0 ) 

CD P co 
x a. E 


CO 

-Q 

3 

k_ 

x: 

0 

c 

0 

Q. 

0 

X 


< < 


cO cO co 
GO to to 
c c c 

> > > x 
co co 0 3 
5 5 5 .a 
© © ® ~ 

> > > CO 

■O -6 -o ^ 

.L= o 

0 0 03 rn 

Cl Cl q_ — 

© © © 9 - < 

x x x £ z 


eg 

to 

c 


■C © 
o o 
c c 
0 © 

1 _ 4 — 

r xj 

® £ 

> CO 

o w 

CD CD 

•s ® 
jg *- 
CL 4- 

_ o 

to ® 

to 2 

.£ CL 


< o 


03 

5 

0 

> 


X 

O) o 
E — 
o to 
c E 


CO 

jQ 

3 

L_ 

_c 

CO 

CO 

CD 

CD 


r- w 

E w 

0 o 




CO 

3 

CO 

*o 

c 

03 


CO 
CD 
CD 

0-0 ~ 


CO 

GO 

0 

o 

Q 


X 

o 

jQ 

*co 

E 

> > > 

03 03 03 

5 5 5 

0 0 0 

> > > 


-O ® m 

i= u. ® 

all 

x ^ £ 


X 

o 

p 

'co 

E 

w" 

0 

0 


0 

o 

c 

0 


ra 

to 

c 

JZ ©’ 
o o 
c c 
0 0 
k. •*— 

t! -D 

® £ 

> co 

o w 

CD 0 

m ® 

_C0 ^ 

CL 4- 
_ O 

ca ® 

« 2 

.£ CL 

5 

> ® 'CO 

^ I E 

i- w ® 

lit 

x3 £ 


o 

c 

© 


0 

> 

o 

0 

4 -« 

0 

CL 

to 

C 

S' X 

0 o 

5 

0 = 

> « 

■O E 

•= o 

g.® 

0 Q. 

x £ 


< < < 


« 

0 

© 


© 

o 

c 

p 

0 * 

© 


m 


o 


o o 

CO CO 


02 r- o CO 
N N CO O) 


O 1^. 

CO CO 


02 


0 


X 

o 

p 

to 

E 

0 

5 

© 

> 


o 

0 

>2 . 

Cp x 

>> . 
co x 





.— 

TO 

T3 

w 

TD 


>> 

0 

>n 

0 x 

■a 




c 

IE 

5 o 

0 .Q 

W 

JO 

—4 

0 

0 

0 

0 

> 

0 

-> 

"0 

> 

0 

5 

© 

5 o 

0 JD 

© 

0 

0 

© 

5 

0 



■i 

u 

JC 

C 

o 

c 

o 

c 

o 

0 
,_ 

0 
k_ 

0 
,_ 

c 

o 

> 

",_ 


0 
k_ 

c 

o 

C 

o 

C 

o 

_l 

Q E 

a E 

03 

z 

z 

z 

c 

o 

o 

Z 

Q 

Q E 

O 

z 

z 

z 


CM 

CO 





CM 

CO 


in 



02 

o 


CM 

OJ 

CM 

CM 

CM 



o 

O 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

O 

4— 

4— 

1— 

T- 

4— 

4— 

4— 



CM 

CM 

CM 

CM 

CM 

CM 

CM 

CM 

CM 

CM 

CM 

cn 

03 

03 

03 



03 

03 

03 

03 

03 

03 

03 

03 

03 

03 

03 

C/3 

03 

03 

03 



03 

03 

03 

03 

03 

CO 

03 

03 

03 

03 

03 

LLI 

m 

LU 

m 



LU 

LU 

LU 

LU 

LU 

UJ 

LU 

LU 

LU 

LU 

LU 

6 

o 

O 

6 



O 

O 

O 

O 

O 

o 

6 

6 

O 

O 

6 

o 

o 

o 

o 



o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

CM 

CM 

CM 

CM 

<1* 


CM 

CM 

CM 

CM 

CM 

CM 

CM 

CM 

CM 

CM 

CM 



o- 

4£ 

z 

z 

4£ 

4£ 



4£ 

4£ 

4j" 


■M" 


4J- 


£ 


-C 

£ 



_c 

x: 

£1 

JZ 

£ 

x: 

xc 

z: 

3 

■c 

■c 

3 

w 

w 

■c 

tr 

■c 

■c 

3 

•c 

■tr 

■tr 

O 

o 

o 

O 

0 

0 

o 

o 

o 

o 

O 

o 

o 

o 

C/) 

z 

z 

CO 

LU 

LU 

z 

z 

z 

z 

CO 

z 

z 

z 


CO 

CO 


0 0 0 
^ ^ ^ 


in co in 
■ 0 - co 02 


0 

0 

0 

© 

© 

© 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 


0 

0 

© 

0 

CD 

a 

o 

o 

o 

o 

a 

o 

o 

o 

o 

CO 

CO 

CD 

o 

o 

o 

O 

c 

c 

c 

c 

c 

c 

c 

c 

c 

c 

c 

CO 

C 

c 

c 

c 

C 

© 

0 

© 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

© 

© 

CD 

0 

0 

0 

0 

CD 

TJ 

■g 

T3 

TO 

TO 

TO 

p 

TO 

TO 

TO 

p 

C 

TO 

■g 

TO 

TO 

■g 

’w 

w 

‘w 

W 

‘w 

‘w 

w 

W 

‘w 

W 

"w 

CO 

'w 

w 

w 

w 

CO 

0 

© 

0 

© 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

3 

0 

© 

0 

0 

0 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

CD 

X 

X 

X 

X 

cc 


CO 





0 

•4-^ 

CD 



L— 

0 


4t 

4t- 

CM 

■M" 

o 


o 

C\J 


05 

o 

CO 

y— 

o 

CO 

o 

o 

"c5 

o 

00 

02 

4— 

in 





05 

05 

Q. 

0 

CO 

05 

CM 

CO 

_1 

CO 

CO 

_i 

C02 

rL 

rl 

CO 

02 

o 

o 





ii 

rl 


00 

00 

u] 

m 

o 

o 

Q 

00 

CM 

CM 

CM 

CM 








4-144 





c 

o 

o 


CO 

00 

■'t 

UJ 

_l 

CO 

< 

I- 


o 

© 

o 

a. 


<A 

c 

g 

a 

x 

LU 

g 

_c 

"5 

a 

h. 

g 

'g 

ffi 

JZ 


g 


TO 

G 

4-1 

g 

'o 

O 

<A 

(A 

< 

<0 

a> 

w 

< 

-X 

w 

O 

C 

o 


CA 

c 

o 

o 

g 

.c 


0 ) 

0 ) 

LL 

O 

o 


(A 

G 

(A 

<A 

g 

c 

(A 

3 

m 

T3 

C 

(0 

CA 

G 

O 

c 

G 

■a 

CA 

G 

cc 


CO 

05 


T3 

G 

CO 

o 

CL 

o 


CA 

'co 

‘co 

CQ 

.c 

r 

o 


■a 

G 

a 

0 ) 

< 

> 

5 

c 

G 

O 

a. 

5 

G 

k_ 

Z3 

G 

G 


O w. 
o s 

G -® 

CL E 

CO 3 

©z 

•— C 

CO _G 
CL 


o to 
G ~ G 

3 < 

Ei=jc 

o CA 

2 c o 
— o ^ 
O > 


G 


E 
o 

o 

o 05 

5 TO CA < 

2 UJ c ^ 

CA O TO 

Q o o 


o ® 

® G 

5 ® 


G 

E 

c 


X 

X 

o 

o 


jg 

G 

G 

E 

E 

G 

G 

C5 

O 

G 

G 

CL 

a. 

G 

G 

0C 

CC 


G 

CA 

3 

V - ©' 

G CA 

m 2 

= ® 

G o 

1 ®E 

•- to jo 

8 s 
G G — 

G .2 

o o r 

G 2 

7T o *3 

S'® “ 

to-18 
G 0 ® 
O 2 Q. 

E 0) 0. 

G .E G 
Q. O > 

® C O 

cn ® w 


TO 

C 

G 

CO 

G 

G 

a 

(A 

g‘ 

o 

c 

® 

■o' G 
G ® 
O ® 


<<<<<< 


G 

5 

o 

TO 

c 

3 

O 

k_ 

G 

05 

c 

o 

c 

G 


G 

k_ 

k _ 

Q 

JD 

G 

4 —' 

CA 

c 


G 

X 

o 

JO 

X 

o 

JO 

G 

CO o 

IS 

G 

G 

G 

G 

G 

G 

c 

— 

r~ 

C 

G G 

— o 

C 

C 

C 

C 

C 

C 

o 

05 

05 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

Z 

2 

2 

z 

a co 

z 

Z 

z 

z 

z 

z 


in 

cm 

co 

co 

LU 


CO N- 

CM CM 

CO CO 
CO CO 

LLI LU 


CO 05 
CM CM 
CO CO 
CO CO 
LLI UJ 


O 1- CM 
CM CM CM 
CM CM CM 

CO CO CO 
CO CO CO 


CO CO 
CM CM 
CM CM 

CO CO 
CO CO 


G 

5 

o 

c 

o 

'ca 

CA 

'E 

ca 

c 

G 


tj- in 
CM CM 
CM CM 

CO CO 
CO CO 


LU LU LU UJ LU LU LU 


o 

O 

O 

O 

O 

O 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

O 

O 

O 

o 

O 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

CM 

CM 

CM 

CM 

CM 

CM 

CM 

CM 

CM 

CM 

CM 

CM 

-t 

■f 

■M- 

■O' 

G- 

it 

Tt 

■>t 

•'t 

Tt 

"t - 



CA 

G 

G 

.C 

-C 

x: 

£ 

■C 

-C 

■C 

■C 

_c 

.c 

x: 

■c 

■c 

■c 

3 

t 

•c 

■c 

to 

to 

to 

■c 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

z 

z 

z 

CO 

z 

z 

z 

z 

z 

z 

z 


O 

05 O 00 05 

in r- m m 


CO 00 O G- CO O t- 

N 00 N N in to Ol 


X 

TO 

c 

G 

CL 

CL 

< 

C 

G 


® w 

G 

a) 

G 



G 

G 

G 


G 

G 

G 

0 

c 


C G 

O 

o 

G 

CO 

0 

O 

O 

O 

0 

O 

0 

O 

0 


-£ c 

C 

c 

C 

C/) 

0 

C 

C 

c 

0 

C 

c 

c 



~ tA 

G 

a) 

G 

0 

0 

G 

G 

G 

0 

G 

G 

G 

CL 


® 3 

TO 

*o 

TO 

c 

c 

;g 

;g 

TO 

C 

TO 

TO 

TO 

O 


® CD 

W 

‘to 

- CA 

'0 

‘0 

'w 

"w 

'« 

'0 

'« 

'lA 

CA 

4— 

a> 

CC 

G 

0 

G 

3 

3 

G 

G 

G 

3 

G 

G 

G 

O 


CC 

a: 

CC 

CD 

CD 

DC 

DC 

CC 

CD 

CC 

DC 

CC 

0 

Q. 

JO 

G 














0 

O 














0 

Q. 














CO 

Q. 

G 

-4— ■ 

Tt W 

CM 

CJ> 

CM 

Tt 

C\J 


CO 

0 

CvJ 

Tt 

CO 

0 


O 

z 

^ O 


00 

05 

O 


CM 

CM 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 



= CL 
O G 

G = 
LL 2 

CM 

cvi 

CM 

CO 

co 

in 

in 

Lf5 

in 

in 

in 

in 


II 

^t 









Tt 




< 













as 

z 


4-145 





North Baja would implement the following general measures to minimize construction-related 
hazards and maintain access to the residences and businesses that would be affected by the Project: 

• minimize the amount of trench left open at the end of the workday and cordon off the 
trench during non-work hours; 

• cover the trench with steel plates where necessary to allow traffic passage and reduce 
safety hazards; 

• install safety fencing for a minimum of 100 feet on either side of residences that are 
within 100 feet of the construction work area; 

• secure and patrol construction areas during non-work hours to minimize safety issues 
associated with open trenches; 

• maintain an emergency ingress and egress near all residences and businesses throughout 
the construction process; 

• maintain at least one lane of restricted traffic movement through the construction area for 
access to residences and for emergency vehicles; 

• minimize noise by maintaining equipment in good operating condition; and 

• suppress dust with the use of water trucks and regular spraying. 

In addition to the measures identified above. North Baja has prepared and would follow Site- 
specific Residential Construction Mitigation Plans to minimize disruption and to maintain access to the 
residences and businesses within 100 feet of the construction work area associated with the B-Line and 
IID Lateral. The site-specific mitigation measures North Baja would use for each of the features 
potentially affected at the residences and businesses identified along 18 th Avenue and Imperial County 
roadways are summarized in Table 4.8.3-1. Appendix O contains dimensioned site plans that show the 
following items within a minimum of 100 feet of the construction work area: 

• the proposed centerline of the pipeline; 

• the limits of the construction work area; 

• the edge of the paved road surface; 

• each residence/business and associated structures; 

• existing pipelines and powerlines; 

• waterbodies, roads, driveways, fences, trees or other landscaping, and private wells; and 

• the location of safety fencing that would be installed during construction. 

Implementation of North Baja’s general mitigation measures as well as its Site-specific 
Residential Construction Mitigation Plans and Traffic Management Plans would reduce the potential 
impacts of construction on residences and businesses to less than significant levels. 

Because the B-Line and IID Lateral in residential areas would be located in county road rights-of- 
way, which already restrict land use, operation of the pipelines would not have an incremental effect upon 
residential owners’ current land uses or activities and would not cause any long-term property damage. In 
addition, because the pipelines would be buried, they would not physically divide an established 
community. 


4-146 



4.8.3.2 Planned Developments 

Planned developments within 0.25 mile of the proposed pipeline facilities and associated 
aboveground facilities were identified through consultations with local planning agencies and landowners 
and are summarized below. Section 4.15 includes an analysis of potential cumulative effects of these 
projects when considered in conjunction with the proposed Project. 

Development plans for the Edgewater Lane Planned Residential Community have been submitted 
to the City of Blythe. The residential development is proposed to be located along Riviera Drive, 
adjacent to the Colorado River and North Baja’s existing pipeline easement for the A-Line. The plans are 
currently under review by the City of Blythe. If approved, construction would occur in 2007. City right- 
of-way for a realignment of Riviera Drive, a precursor to this subdivision, has been recorded by the 
Riverside County Recorders Office. North Baja has had preliminary discussions with the developer of the 
proposed Edgewater Lane Planned Residential Community to determine how to make the North Baja 
Pipeline Expansion Project and the residential project compatible. North Baja would continue to work 
with the developer as both projects move forward to ensure that both projects are consistent with one 
another. 


The Imperial County Planning Department has prepared a specific plan for “Felicity,” a 2,345- 
acre master planned community that would be north of Interstate 8 and primarily west of Sidewinder 
Road (Imperial County 1998). At its nearest point, the existing A-Line and proposed B-Line, as well as 
the expanded Ogilby Meter Station, would be approximately 2 miles west of the proposed development. 
Although the specific plan has been approved and adopted by the Imperial County Board of Supervisors, 
implementation of the Felicity planned community has been put on hold indefinitely (Imperial County 
2005). 


Although not residential in nature, several other projects have been proposed by various agencies 
and could be affected by the proposed Project. These projects include the All-American Canal Lining 
Project, the Drop 2 Reservoir Project, and the USCIS Border Fence. 

The IID has issued plans to line 23 miles of the 82-mile-long All-American Canal to prevent the 
continual seepage that has been occurring since the canal originally started delivering water to Imperial 
Valley in 1940. The final EIS for the project was issued in 1997; however, a scheduled start date for the 
project has not yet been established. The IID Lateral would be constructed in the same vicinity as the 
lining project between MPs 2.3 and 7.9. North Baja has consulted with the IID on the location of the two 
projects to avoid locational conflicts and would continue to coordinate with the IID as both projects move 
forward. Details on alternatives evaluated in this area are presented in Section 3.2.3.2. 

The BOR has proposed a water storage reservoir at the former Brock Research Station, referred to 
as the Drop 2 Reservoir Project. A new canal would extend eastward from the reservoir. The alignment 
of the new canal would either be just north of Evan Hewes Highway or in the center of the highway itself 
(the highway would be removed). The proposed IID Lateral alignment would be just south of the current 
paved roadway but it may be moved to an alignment just north of the highway if the new canal is built 
where Evan Hewes Highway now lies (see Section 3.2.4.1). 

The U.S. Congress is considering a bill to authorize construction of a fence along the entire U.S.- 
Mexico border to assist in homeland security and border control issues. Currently the USCIS only 
maintains a 15-mile-long border fence in the San Diego area. There are no definitive plans for 
constructing a border fence along the border at MP 79.8 where the B-Line crosses from the United States 
into Mexico or along the IID Lateral where it is closest to the border between MPs 7.9 and 16.0. 


4-147 


Because North Baja would continue to work with the developers and applicable agencies 
associated with these projects to ensure that the proposed Project does not conflict with the development 
plans, impacts on these areas are expected to be less than significant. 

4.8.4 Special Management Areas 

4.8.4.1 California Desert Conservation Area 

Approximately 64.4 miles (81 percent) of the B-Line route in California are within the CDCA 
(MPs 3.5 to 22.3 and MPs 34.2 to 79.8). The BEI Lateral is not within the CDCA. The entire 45.7 miles 
of the IID Lateral route are within the CDCA. Pursuant to the FLPMA, the BLM prepared a 
comprehensive land use management plan for the area (the CDCA Plan) in 1980. The intent of the 
CDCA Plan is to “...provide for the immediate and future protection and administration of the public 
lands in the California Desert within the framework of a program of multiple use and sustained yield, and 
the maintenance of environmental quality” (BLM 1980). Figure 4.8.4-1 shows the location of the CDCA 
boundary in relation to BLM land and the proposed pipeline routes. 

About 50.7 miles of the B-Line and 25.7 miles 3 of the IID Lateral within the CDCA are managed 
by the BLM (see Figure 4.8.4-1). All of the public lands within the CDCA under BLM management have 
been designated geographically into four MUCs (BLM 1980): Controlled Use (“C”), Limited Use (“L”), 
Moderate Use (“M”), and Intensive Use (“I”). Along the proposed B-Line route MUCs “L” (25.2 miles) 
and “M” (25.5 miles) would be crossed. Along the proposed IID Lateral route MUCs “L” (20.8 miles) 
and “I” (4.9 miles) would be crossed. The CDCA Plan stipulates that new gas transmission facilities 
located in MUCs “L,” “M,” and “I” lands may be allowed only within designated corridors. 

Under the Energy Production and Utility Corridors Element of the CDCA Plan, 16 planning 
corridors were identified to address utility facilities, including all pipelines with diameters greater than 12 
inches (BLM 1980). Eight additional corridors are currently identified as contingent corridors. 
Approximately 35.1 miles of the B-Line route within the CDCA would be within designated Utility 
Corridors J and L, of which 29.9 miles are managed by the BLM (see Figure 4.8.4-1). Utility Corridor J 
is a 2-mile-wide corridor that runs north-south through the southeastern portion of California. The B-Line 
is within Utility Corridor J between MPs 10.8 and 22.3, MPs 36.5 and 53.8, and MPs 65.2 and 68.3. 
Between MPs 74.3 and 77.4, the proposed B-Line crosses Utility Corridor L, which is an east-west 
running corridor along Interstate 8. 

Approximately 20.4 miles of the IID Lateral route within the CDCA would be within designated 
Utility Corridor L, of which 18.9 miles are managed by the BLM (see Figure 4.8.4-1). The IID Lateral is 
within Utility Corridor L between MPs 0.0 and 18.9 and MPs 26.0 and 27.5. 

All other portions of the proposed B-Line and IID Lateral within the CDCA would be outside a 
designated utility corridor. The portions of the proposed route that are on lands within the CDCA and 
managed by the BLM but outside a designated utility corridor (approximately 20.8 miles for the B-Line 
and 6.8 miles for the IID Lateral) are in conflict with the CDCA Plan and would require an amendment to 
the plan. 


J Of this total, about 17.6 miles would be located within county road rights-of-way across BLM land. 


4-148 






4-149 




















































Although approximately 20.8 miles of the proposed B-Line on BLM lands are in conflict with the 
CDCA Plan because they are outside of a designated utility corridor, approximately 1.5 miles of the 20.8 
miles are within a contingent utility corridor. Between MPs 69.7 and 72.5, the proposed B-Line bisects 
Utility Corridor T, which runs in a general northwest to southeast direction adjacent to the Southern 
Pacific Railroad (see Figure 4.8.4-1). The CDCA Plan identifies this corridor as a contingent utility 
corridor having some potential for use in the future (BLM 1980). A contingent utility corridor is not an 
officially designated utility corridor until a plan amendment for the use of the corridor is approved. While 
this portion of the proposed route would still require a plan amendment, it would be within a utility 
corridor that has been identified for future potential use. 

Although the proposed Project is not consistent with the current CDCA Plan, it would be 
consistent with previous projects and the goal of grouping similar land uses. The proposed B-Line would 
be entirely adjacent to North Baja’s existing A-Line, which was the subject of an amendment to the 
CDCA Plan and previously approved by the BLM in 2002. In addition, the portion of the IID Lateral 
route outside of designated utility corridors would be within or adjacent to existing transportation 
(Interstate 8 and Imperial County roadways) and transmission line rights-of-way. 

North Baja submitted an amended Right-of-Way Grant application to the BLM in May 2005 and 
would need to receive the BLM’s approval in order to locate the pipeline facilities on BLM lands. It 
would also be the BLM’s responsibility to amend the CDCA Plan (see Section 1.7). The plan amendment 
would avoid conflict with the CDCA Plan and would, therefore, not be a significant impact. The 
amendment would only accommodate the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project and would not create a 
new- corridor or modify existing corridors. 

4.8.4.2 Milpitas Wash Special Management Area 

The proposed B-Line crosses the Milpitas Wash SMA generally between MPs 29.4 and 34.2, 
crossing approximately 4.4 miles of BLM managed land (see Figure 4.8.4-1). The Milpitas Wash SMA is 
managed by the BLM Yuma Field Office under the Yuma District Plan. The purpose of the Yuma 
District Plan is to provide a comprehensive framework for managing public land and resources in the 
Yuma District. The Yuma District Plan adopted the preferred alternative analyzed during an EIS process 
addressing six major issues and concerns identified by the public, other agencies, and BLM staff. The six 
issues included wildlife habitat, special management areas, grazing, land ownership adjustment, rights-of- 
way, and recreation. The theme of the preferred alternative adopted by the Yuma District Plan is to 
“balance competing demands by providing for development of needed resources while protecting 
important and sensitive environmental values” (BLM 1985). As part of the Yuma District Plan, several 
areas were identified to be managed under special management prescriptions, including the Milpitas 
Wash SMA. The Milpitas Wash SMA was designated for its natural values, which include undisturbed 
desert vegetation, wildlife habitat, and cultural resources. The Yuma District Plan prohibits new utilities 
or rights-of-way across the Milpitas Wash SMA. 

Of the approximately 4.4 miles crossed by the proposed B-Line within the Milpitas Wash SMA, 
2.5 miles are managed by the BLM. Allowing construction of the proposed B-Line across these 2.5 miles 
would require an amendment to the Yuma District Plan. 

This draft EIS/EIR proposes to modify the land use plan decisions to the extent needed to allow 
the BLM to issue North Baja a permit to cross the Milpitas Wash SMA. The Yuma District is currently in 
the process of revising its plan and is considering a proposal that would reroute the utility corridor to 
follow SR 78. Because the B-Line would be within this new utility corridor, adoption of this revision 
would eliminate the need for a plan amendment for the proposed North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project. 
The revised plan, however, is not expected to be completed before the environmental review process for 


4-150 


the proposed Project is completed. Therefore, for the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project, this 
EIS/EIR will be used by the BLM to consider amending the current Yuma District Plan. 

Although the B-Line deviates from designated utility corridors within the Milpitas Wash SMA, it 
would be collocated with North Baja’s existing A-Line. The BLM approved an amendment to the Yuma 
District Plan to accommodate this pipeline in 2002. North Baja submitted an amended Right-of-Way 
Grant application to the BLM in May 2005 and would need to receive the BLM’s approval to locate the 
B-Line on BLM lands. It would also be the BLM’s responsibility to amend the Yuma District Plan to 
accommodate the B-Line (see Section 1.7). The plan amendment would avoid conflict with the Yuma 
District Plan and would, therefore, not be a significant impact. The amendment would only accommodate 
the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project and would not create a new corridor or modify existing 
corridors. 

4.8.4.3 Imperial Sand Dunes Recreation Area 

The ISDRA was created in 1977 for the purpose of providing a formal space for OHV use 
(Congressional Resources Committee 2005). The ISDRA covers 248 square miles, with a length of more 
than 40 miles and an average width of about 5 miles (see Figure 4.8.4-1). The ISDRA is managed by the 
BLM El Centro Field Office and is a popular OHV use area. OHV recreation in the dunes became an 
important recreational activity in the post-World War II era with the availability of surplus U.S. Army 
Jeeps (BLM 2003). The ISDRA typically hosts 1.4 million OHV visitors per year, mostly between the 
months of September and May, when the weather is cooler (summer dunes temperatures reach well past 
110 °F). Camping (with recreational vehicles or vacation trailers) and sightseeing are also popular 
activities in this area. 

The ISDRA is divided into eight management areas, of which six are open to OHV use. The two 
management areas not open to OHV use are the North Algodones Dunes Wilderness, which is completely 
closed to motorized traffic, and the Adaptive Management Area, where limited use has been established 
while monitoring is taking place. The management areas that are open to OHV use include: Mammoth 
Wash, Ogilby, Glamis, Gecko, Dune Buggy Flats, and Buttercup (BLM 2003). The Gecko and Buttercup 
Management Areas have formal campgrounds; these include pit toilets, some paved driving surfaces, and 
signage. The B-Line would cross the Ogilby Management Area between MPs 71.1 and 74.5. The IID 
Lateral would cross the Ogilby Management Area between MPs 0.0 and 2.3 and the Buttercup 
Management Area between MPs 2.3 and 7.9. 

The Ogilby Management Area is designated MUC “M” by the ISDRA Plan and is popular with 
families and groups that enjoy OHV use away from intensively used areas in the ISDRA. The Buttercup 
Management Area is designated MUC “I” by the ISDRA Plan and is used for camping, sightseeing, 
commercial vending, education, filming, and rights-of-way. 

Between MPs 71.1 and 74.5, the B-Line would be within North Baja’s existing right-of-way 
associated with the A-Line and would also be adjacent to Ogilby Road, which marks the eastern edge of 
the ISDRA and the Ogilby Management Area. This portion of the route is in an area of lighter OHV use 
and away from any developed recreational facilities. As a result, the B-Line is not expected to have a 
significant impact on this area and agencies have not expressed concern about this portion of the Project. 
However, agencies have expressed concern about locating the IID Lateral through the more heavily used 
portions of the ISDRA. 

North Baja selected the proposed IID Lateral route based on an evaluation of alternative routes 
and in consultation with the BOR, the IID, the BLM, and the members of the ISDRA Technical Review 
Team. Alternatives that were considered for the route through this area are discussed in Section 3.2.3.2. 


4-151 


The location of the proposed route alignment accounts for concerns that arose during consultation 
meetings. 

The eastern end of the proposed IID Lateral (west of the All-American Canal and Interstate 8) 
would be adjacent to an existing 500-kilovolt (kV) transmission line from MPs 0.1 to 2.3. This portion of 
the route is in the Ogilby Management Area in an area of lighter OHV use and away from any developed 
recreational facilities. Between MPs 2.3 and 2.6, the pipeline would be installed beneath Interstate 8 and 
the All-American Canal using the HDD method. From MP 2.6, the alignment continues west adjacent to 
the CalTrans right-of-way associated with Interstate 8 as well as existing transmission lines for 3.1 miles 
to MP 5.7. In this segment the route traverses the northern edge of the Buttercup Campground, avoiding 
the main parking and vendor area by staying close to the CalTrans right-of-way. This alignment was 
suggested by the ISDRA Technical Review Team. North Baja made other alignment adjustments in this 
stretch at the suggestion of the BLM, with the goal of avoiding the most intensively used areas. 

At MP 5.7, the IID Lateral would cross Interstate 8 to an area between the freeway and the All- 
American Canal where there is no access for OHV users. The IID Lateral would cross this area between 
MPs 5.7 and 7.9, adjacent to an area that would be used by the IID for its All-American Canal Lining 
Project (see Section 4.8.3.2). The IID Lateral would be installed beneath the All-American Canal (and 
exit the ISDRA) at MP 7.9. A valve would be located at MP 7.6 in an area between the Interstate 8 right- 
of-way and the All-American Canal, which is closed to OHV activity. 

Peak OHV use season in the ISDRA is from Labor Day to Easter, and is especially high in 
November and December. This prompted a suggestion from BLM recreation planners and the ISDRA 
Technical Review Team that construction of the IID Lateral take place during the summer months to 
avoid conflict with the high-use recreational season (BLM 2005). North Baja has incorporated this 
suggestion into its proposed construction schedule (see Section 2.4). The ISDRA Technical Review 
Team also raised concerns that various recreational activities might conflict with the pipeline if it was 
buried at standard depths. In response to these concerns, North Baja would bury the IID Lateral to ensure 
6 feet of cover (3 feet more than typical pipeline depths) between MPs 2.7 and 5.7. 

During construction, the work area within the ISDRA would be fenced to prevent recreational 
users from entering the construction area. This would result in a short-term restriction on recreational use 
in the area. Because it would be short term (i.e., considerably less than 1 year) and would occur during 
the summer months when use of the area is at its lowest, this impact would not be considered significant. 
Once the IID Lateral has been installed, surface contours would be re-established and the pipeline right- 
of-way would not be restricted for OHV use. As a result, no significant impacts on recreational use 
would occur during normal pipeline operations. Short-term recreational impacts could result from 
operation and maintenance activities if North Baja needed to perform major maintenance work, such as 
pipeline repairs; however, such major work would be rare and, if needed, would be completed in less than 
1 year so no significant impacts would occur. Routine maintenance at the valve at MP 7.6 would occur 
inside the fenced valve site and would not affect recreational use. 

4.8.5 Recreation and Public Interest Areas 

The proposed pipeline facilities would not cross any national or State forests. National or 
California Wild and Scenic Rivers, registered national natural landmarks, lands designated under a 
Habitat Conservation Plan, golf courses, or areas designated under the National Trails System. However, 
the proposed route crosses 11 recreation or public interest areas and is adjacent to several others. Table 
4.8.5-1 lists the locations and crossing length (if applicable) for each of these areas. A more detailed 
discussion of each area is provided below. Schools in the Project area are discussed in Section 4.9.4. 


4-152 


TABLE 4.8.5-1 

Recreation and Public Interest Areas Crossed by or Adjacent to the 


North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 

Facility 

Milepost 

Location 

Name of Area 

Crossing Length 

B-Line 

0.0 

Ehrenberg Sandbowl Off-Highway Vehicle (OHV) Area 

NA - 1.0 mile southeast 


0.1 

Colorado River access area 

NA - 0.1 mile south 


0.2 

Colorado River 

768 feet 


15.7 

Mule Mountains Area of Critical Environmental Concern 
(ACEC) 

NA - 0.9 mile west 


18.3 

Bradshaw Trail 

50 feet 


19.2-22.3 

Metropolitan Water District Property 

3.1 miles 


25.0 

Palo Verde Mountains County Park 

NA - 1.3 miles east 


25.5 

Oxbow Recreation Site 

NA - 1.1 miles east 


29.2-29.6 

Bureau of Reclamation quarry 

NA - 0.1 mile west 


31.0 

Palo Verde Wilderness Area 

NA - 1.0 mile west 


29.9-32.3 a 

Cibola National Wildlife Refuge 

1.2 miles 


35.2-50.0 

Wildlife Habitat Management Area 

14.8 miles 


49.0 

Indian Pass Wilderness Area 

NA - 1.9 miles east 


66.5 

Tumco Mine Area Landmark 

NA - 1.2 miles east 


71.1-74.5 

Imperial Sand Dunes Recreation Area (ISDRA), Ogilby 
Management Area 

3.4 miles 


79.6 

Pilot Knob ACEC 

NA - 1.0 mile east 

BEI Lateral 

0.4-0.6 

Riviera Recreational Vehicle Resort 

NA - adjacent 

IID Lateral 

0.0-2.3 

ISDRA, Ogilby Management Area 

2.3 miles 


2.3-4.3 

Plank Road ACEC 

NA-0.1 mile southeast 


4.9-5.6 

Plank Road ACEC 

0.7 mile 


6.8 

Plank Road Interpretive Site 

NA-0.1 mile southeast 


2.3-7.9 

ISDRA, Buttercup Management Area 

5.6 miles 


13.7-18.7 

East Mesa ACEC 

5.0 miles 


13.7-21.1 

East Mesa Flat-tailed Horned Lizard Management Area 

7.4 miles 


27.4 

Hot Springs Long Term Visitor Area 

NA-0.1 mile north 


27.3-27.6 

Lake Cahuilla ACEC 

0.3 mile 


The proposed B-Line would cross the Cibola National Wildlife Refuge intermittently between MPs 29.9 and 32.3 for a 
total of 1.2 miles. Specifically, the B-Line would cross the Cibola National Wildlife Refuge between MPs 29.9-30.0, 
30.3-30.4, 30.7-30.8, 30.9-31.3, and 31.8-32.3. 

NA = Not applicable. 


One of the primary concerns when crossing recreation and public interest areas is the impact of 
construction on the purpose for which the area was established (e.g., the recreational activities, public 
access, and resources the area aims to protect). Construction would alter visual aesthetics by removing 
existing vegetation and disturbing soils. Construction would also generate dust and noise, which could be 
a nuisance to recreational users. Construction could also interfere with or diminish the quality of the 
recreational experience by affecting wildlife movements or disturbing trails. In general, impacts on 
recreational and public interest areas would be temporary and would be limited to the period of active 
construction, which typically would last only several days to several weeks in any one area. 

In general, North Baja would minimize construction-related impacts on these areas by: 


4-153 






• installing the B-Line entirely within the existing right-of-way maintained for the A-Line; 

• installing the IID Lateral almost entirely within or adjacent to existing road and 
transmission line rights-of-way; 

• timing construction to avoid peak usage periods, when practical; and 

• ensuring effective post-construction reclamation of the right-of-way to preconstruction 
conditions. 

Off-Highway Areas and Use 

OHV use in the Project area is variable in terms of both season and location. OHV use occurs 
most frequently during the winter months with the heaviest use occurring on the weekends. The 
Ehrenberg Sandbowl OHV Area is 1.0 mile southeast of the Ehrenberg Compressor Station site. Further 
south, along the terminus of the proposed B-Line and along the beginning of the proposed IID Lateral, the 
ISDRA provides a large area of OHV use (see Section 4.8.4.3). In addition, OHV use is common but 
regulated on BLM lands outside of these areas and along the routes of the B-Line and IID Lateral. 

BLM land within the CDCA is designated open, closed, or limited for vehicle use. Route 
designations are generally made on the basis of MUCs. MUC “M” (approximately 25.5 miles of the B- 
Line), MUC “L” (approximately 25.2 miles of the B-Line and 20.8 miles of the IID Lateral), and MUC 
“I” (approximately 4.9 miles of the IID Lateral) fall under the limited vehicle use designation. Limited 
vehicle access means that motorized-vehicle access is allowed only on certain routes of travel, which 
include roads, trails, and washes (BLM 1980). At a minimum, use is restricted to existing routes of 
travel. An existing route of travel is a route that was established before approval of the CDCA Plan in 
1980 with a minimum width of 2 feet, showing significant surface evidence of prior vehicle use or, for 
washes, history of prior use. On MUC “M” lands, access is allowed on existing routes unless it is 
determined that use on specific routes must be limited further. On MUC “L” lands, vehicle access is 
directed toward use of approved routes of travel due to higher levels of resource sensitivity in this MUC. 
On MUC “I” lands, those areas not designated as open are limited to existing routes. 

During construction, the Project could have an impact on OHV areas and users by restricting 
access to areas designated for OHV use. Conversely, the pipeline rights-of-way could increase 
accessibility for OHV use into previously inaccessible, environmentally sensitive areas. To reduce the 
potential for interference between pipeline construction activities and authorized OHV use, as well as 
unauthorized OHV use of the pipeline rights-of-way after construction, North Baja developed an Off- 
Highway Vehicle Management Plan (OHV Plan) that addresses the initial siting, construction, and 
operation of the proposed facilities. North Baja’s OHV Plan was developed in consultation with BLM 
recreation specialists and biologists in 2001 and 2002 during planning for the original North Baja Pipeline 
Project and again in 2005 during planning for the proposed Project. The OHV Plan is also based on 
experience North Baja has gained while operating, maintaining, and managing the A-Line right-of-way 
since 2002. The OHV Plan is provided in Appendix P. 

In the area that would be crossed by the B-Line, OHV use is permitted only on BLM-designated 
routes of travel except between MPs 71.1 and 74.5 (see Section 4.8.4.3). Before construction, North Baja 
would clearly mark the extent of the construction work area. Where active construction is underway, the 
right-of-way would be occupied by workers and equipment and restricted for OHV use. OHV users 
would be directed back to designated routes of travel. Additional measures North Baja would implement 
to minimize construction-related impacts on OHV users in the ISDRA are discussed in Section 4.8.4.3. 


4-154 


Because any impacts associated with restricted OHV use would be short term (i.e., considerably less than 
1 year), they would not be considered significant. 

Where the proposed pipelines would be in areas of authorized OHV use, the pipeline rights-of- 
way would not be restricted for OHV use. However, to minimize the potential for the pipeline rights-of- 
way to increase accessibility for OHV use into previously inaccessible, environmentally sensitive areas, 
North Baja would implement various blocking measures as described below. 

• Berms would be placed across the right-of-way where it intersects an existing OHV road. 
Berm slopes would not exceed 30 percent. 

• Berms would be placed across the right-of-way as part of erosion control and 
strategically placed to reduce visibility and mimic local topography. 

• Rock redistribution and strategic placement, without making it into a challenging obstacle 
course, would occur across the right-of-way where large rock is available and such work 
would “erase” the visual cues of “road.” 

• The right-of-way would be backbladed or raked by bulldozer or by hand, to erase the 
traces of the intersection of the right-of-way with an existing OHV route or dirt road. 

• Ocotillo and large cacti would be salvaged and replanted where they are available with 
the understanding that survival criteria would not be applied because even dead 
specimens provide convincing visual clues of “no road.” 

• Other desert species, including creosote bush scrub and desert wash woodland species 
(e.g., palo verde, ironwood, smoke tree, etc.) would also be salvaged and replanted with 
the understanding that they would be unlikely to survive but could still provide value as a 
visual block. 

• Woody material removed during construction would be redistributed across the right-of- 
way to both disguise the right-of-way and serve as “vertical mulch.” 

An assessment and detailed description of where these blocking measures would be implemented 
is presented in the OHV Plan (see Appendix P). Implementation of these measures would reduce the 
potential impacts associated with unauthorized OHV use of the right-of-way to less than significant 
levels. 


The Yuma District of the BLM commented that it would like North Baja to place additional signs 
and vegetative barriers at access points along the right-of-way to prohibit OHV use. North Baja has 
agreed to place signs and/or vegetative barriers at access points along the right-of-way if requested by the 
Yuma District. 

A scoping comment was received regarding OHV management within or near the Cibola NWR. 
North Baja met with the manager of the Cibola NWR to review the effects of construction of the A-Line 
within the refuge and to determine the appropriate OHV management measures to be considered for the 
proposed B-Line. The refuge manager recommended that North Baja replace fencing originally installed 
after construction of the A-Line but subsequently destroyed by OHV users. It was also suggested that 
North Baja maintain the fence for 2 years because in remote parts of the refuge, it takes 2 years for 
fencing to become an effective OHV barrier. North Baja has agreed to install and maintain the fencing 
for 2 years along this portion of the B-Line. 


4-155 


A scoping comment was also received regarding OHV management on the Nowell property near 
Riviera Drive at approximately MP 0.4 of the B-Line. After construction of the A-Line, an earthen berm 
was installed across North Baja’s right-of-way on the western edge of Riviera Drive to discourage OHV 
users from gaining access to other .parts of the property from that location. North Baja states that the 
berm proved effective in discouraging access down the right-of-way from this location; however, OHV 
traffic originating from other locations has been relatively heavy on North Baja’s and the adjacent SoCal 
Gas rights-of-way. According to North Baja, this appears to be a continuation of an OHV use pattern 
established before its right-of-way was created. North Baja proposes to reconstruct the earthen berm at 
Riviera Drive after construction of the B-Line and, with the property owner’s concurrence, would leave 
the right-of-way with a rougher surface instead of the smooth finished grade that matches the adjacent 
ground surface. This could make the right-of-way less attractive as a travel way. North Baja would also 
offer to procure and install signs for the property owner, should he choose to attempt to discourage OHV 
access at the main entry points on the property (unrelated to the pipeline right-of-way). 

Colorado River and Access 

The proposed B-Line would cross the Colorado River at MP 0.2, and an access area to the river is 
0.1 mile south of the Ehrenberg Compressor Station. The Colorado River is an area of high recreational 
use, including boating and fishing. The Colorado River would be crossed using the HDD method, which 
would minimize impacts on the river and would not limit the use of the river for recreational purposes. 
However, access to the river may be restricted during welding of the pipe and the pullback for the HDD 
crossing. The period of limited public access would be short term (i.e., considerably less than 1 year) and 
would, therefore, not result in any significant impacts on this area. 

Areas of Critical Environmental Concern 

The FLPMA defines an ACEC as an area within the public lands where special management 
attention is required (when such areas are developed or used or where no development is required) to 
protect and prevent irreparable damage to important historic, cultural, or scenic values, fish and wildlife 
resources, or other natural systems or processes, or to protect life and safety from natural hazards. 
According to the CDCA Plan, the ACEC designation is a process for determining what special 
management certain important environmental resources or hazards require. 

The B-Line would be within 1 mile of two BLM-designated ACECs. The Mule Mountains 
ACEC is about 0.9 mile west of MP 15.7 and the Pilot Knob ACEC is about 1.0 mile east of MP 79.6. 
The management objective of both these ACECs is to protect cultural resources. Because these areas 
would not be crossed by the B-Line, the designated use of these areas would not be affected by the Project 
and no impacts are anticipated. A detailed discussion of cultural resources potentially affected by the 
proposed Project is presented in Section 4.11. 

The IID Lateral would cross three ACECs: Plank Road, East Mesa, and Lake Cahuilla. The IID 
Lateral would be within 0.1 mile of the Plank Road ACEC between MPs 2.3 and 4.3 and would cross this 
ACEC between MPs 4.9 and 5.6. The IID Lateral would cross the Lake Cahuilla ACEC between MPs 
27.3 and 27.6. Both of these ACECs are managed to protect cultural resources. Almost all of the route in 
these locations would be in a designated utility corridor and, therefore, consistent with the designated use 
of the area. As a result, impacts on these areas would be less than significant. A detailed discussion of 
cultural resources potentially affected by the proposed Project is presented in Section 4.11. 

The IID Lateral would also cross the East Mesa ACEC between MPs 13.7 and 18.7. In 2003, the 
effective function of the ACEC was replaced by the adoption of a plan amendment providing for a range¬ 
wide management strategy for this species within the East Mesa Flat-tailed Homed Lizard Management 


4-156 


Area crossed by the IID Lateral between MPs 13.7 and 21.1. The IID Lateral would be at the extreme 
southern boundary of the area within Imperial County road rights-of-way. Additional information on the 
flat-tailed horned lizard, including mitigation measures North Baja would implement to minimize impacts 
on this species, is presented in Section 4.7.6.13. 

Designated Trails 

At MP 18.3 the proposed B-Line would cross the Bradshaw Trail. The Bradshaw Trail is a BLM- 
designated Back-Country Byway. Back-Country Byways are a network of low-standard roads and trails 
or “adventure routes” that are designated as such by the BLM because they cross public lands with high 
scenic or public interest value. Between 1862 and 1877, the Bradshaw Trail was used to transport miners 
and supplies to the gold mines of La Paz (now Ehrenberg), Arizona. The trail was also used as a 
stagecoach route and was the first road through Riverside County. The existing 70-mile-long section of 
this dirt road extends from the North Shore area near the Salton Sea to within 14 miles of the City of 
Blythe. The Bradshaw Tail is periodically graded by the Riverside County Transportation Department. 
The land at the location of the proposed pipeline crossing is managed by the BLM. 

The effects of pipeline construction across the Bradshaw Trail could include restricted or 
temporary loss of use to the public. To mitigate the impacts of construction on public use of the 
Bradshaw Trail, North Baja proposes to perform construction activities during off-peak periods and to 
complete pipeline installation across the trail in just a few days. No adverse impacts on use of the trail are 
known to have occurred during construction of the A-Line, and minimal impact is expected to occur 
during construction of the B-Line. Because the period of limited public access would be short term (i.e., 
considerably less than 1 year), impacts on Bradshaw Trail would be less than significant. No other 
designated trails would be crossed by the proposed Project. 

Metropolitan Water District Property 

North Baja’s existing A-Line crosses about 3.1 miles of undeveloped desert property owned by 
the MWD between MPs 19.2 and 22.3. North Baja has stated that it is unaware of any development plans 
for the property. North Baja’s existing right-of-way agreement with the MWD allows placement of a 
second pipeline within the 50-foot-wide easement. The right-of-way agreement also stipulates certain 
terms such as restoration of surface contours, payment for actual damages caused by North Baja’s 
construction, reconstruction or ingress/egress, and other standard conditions. North Baja would adhere to 
the terms of its easement. By adhering to the terms of its right-of-way agreement, impacts on this 
property would be less than significant. 

Parks and Recreation Sites 

The Palo Verde County Park and Oxbow Recreation Site are 1.3 miles and 1.1 miles, 
respectively, from the proposed B-Line. Because these are low-intensity use areas that are over 1 mile 
from the proposed facilities, no impacts associated with the proposed Project on these areas are 
anticipated. 

Quarries 

Between MPs 29.2 and 29.6 the B-Line would pass near a rock quarry operated by the BOR. The 
quarry is currently inactive. No impacts on the quarry are known to have occurred during or after 
construction of the A-Line. Similarly, construction of the proposed B-Line is not expected to have an 
effect on any possible use of or access to the quarry. No other quarries would be affected by the proposed 
Project. 


4-157 


Wilderness Areas 


The Palo Verde Mountains Wilderness Area is about 1.0 mile west and the Indian Pass 
Wilderness Area is about 1.9 miles east of the B-Line route at MPs 31.0 and 49.0, respectively. The 1964 
Wilderness Act defined wilderness as areas in generally natural condition; areas having outstanding 
opportunities for solitude or a primitive and unconfined type of recreation; areas at least 5,000 acres or 
large enough to preserve use as wilderness; and areas containing ecological, geological, or other features 
of scientific, scenic, or historical value. The Palo Verde Mountains Wilderness Area is a 32,310-acre area 
designated as part of the California Desert Protection Act of 1994. Distinguishing this wilderness area are 
twin buttes known as the Flat Tops, which stand out as a landmark against a range of jagged peaks. 
About 32,083 acres are included in the Indian Pass Wilderness Area, which is a distinctive part of the 
Chocolate Mountains. According to the 1964 Wilderness Act, there shall be no commercial enterprise, no 
permanent road (except as necessary to meet minimum requirements for the administration of the area), 
no temporary road, no use of motor vehicles, motorized equipment or motorboats, no landing of aircraft, 
no other form of mechanical transport, and no structure or installation within any such area. The area of 
the proposed Project does not intersect or overlap with any wilderness areas, and thus no impacts are 
anticipated. 

Wildlife Refuges 

The proposed B-Line would cross a total of 1.2 miles of the Cibola NWR at various locations 
between approximately MPs 29.9 and 32.3. The refuge was established in 1964 to protect the wintering 
grounds for migratory birds and other wildlife. Access to the refuge and use of the area by humans is 
strictly controlled to protect wildlife habitat. As discussed in Section 1.5.2, a decision that allows a 
crossing of the Cibola NWR must be compatible with the FWS Refuge Management Regulations in Part 
603 FW 2.10(D). In approving a proposed utility right-of-way across the Cibola NWR, the Refuge 
Manager must find that none of the conditions listed in Part 603 FW 2.10(D) exist with regards to the 
proposed Project. The existing A-Line complied with these conditions and a favorable Compatibility 
Determination was issued for the installation of that pipeline. Therefore, a favorable Compatibility 
Determination is expected to be issued for the proposed B-Line. As a result, no significant impacts on 
this area are anticipated. No other State or national wildlife refuges would be crossed by or adjacent to 
the proposed pipelines. 

Wildlife Habitat Management Area 

The proposed B-Line would cross a multi-species WHMA between MPs 35.2 and 50.0. This 
segment of the route also crosses two portions of proposed WHMAs for bighorn sheep (MPs 35.2 to 42.0 
and MPs 49.0 to 50.0). North Baja would also expand an existing valve site within this area (valve #6 at 
MP 41.6). Construction-related activities could impact wildlife in the WHMA. The majority of the 
pipeline route in this area would be within a designated utility corridor. Management goals for the 
WHMA include the maintenance of naturally occurring distributions of 28 special status animal species 
and 30 special status plant species. A second goal is to maintain proper functioning conditions in all 
natural communities with special emphasis on communities that are present in small quantities, have a 
high species richness, and support many special status species. The third goal is to maintain ecological 
processes by maintaining naturally occurring interrelationships among various biotic and abiotic elements 
of the environment. 

According to the BLM, required mitigation measures within the WHMA include limiting 
construction activities to between July 1 and December 1 if Crissal thrashers are present, implementation 
of special mitigation measures to avoid disturbance of Couch’s spadefoot toad habitat, and compensation 
for disturbance of desert dry wash woodland and desert chenopod scrub communities. Details on North 


4-158 


Baja’s proposed mitigation measures for the Crissal thrasher and the Couch’s spadefoot toad are 
presented in Sections 4.7.6.5 and 4.7.6.12, respectively. North Baja’s proposed mitigation measures for 
disturbance of desert wash woodlands and other desert vegetation communities are described in Section 
4.5.3. 

Registered Natural and Historical Landmarks 

One registered natural landmark, the Tumco Mine area, is about 1.2 miles east of the B-Line 
route at MP 66.5. Historically, the Tumco Mine area was a gold camp that reached its peak development 
between 1893 and 1899 (Donald Laird Consulting 2000). This site was evaluated before construction of 
the A-Line and no effects associated with construction of the B-Line construction are anticipated. 

The Plank Road, a California State Historical Landmark, lies in the vicinity of the proposed IID 
Lateral. At its nearest point, the Plank Road interpretive site is about 0.1 mile southeast of MP 6.8 of the 
IID Lateral. The Plank Road was a wooden, portable driving surface to provide for the passage of 
automobiles across the Algodones Dunes and was in use from 1916 through 1926 (BLM 1998). Because 
the locations of segments of the Plank Road are unknown, it could be encountered during construction of 
the IID Lateral. Additional information on the Plank Road is provided in Section 4.10. 

Camping 

The BEI Lateral would be adjacent to the Riviera Recreational Vehicle (RV) Resort between MPs 
0.4 and 0.6. The lateral in this location would be installed within the right-of-way associated with Riviera 
Drive. North Baja proposes to keep all construction activities within the limits of the road right-of-way. 
The campground property is separated from the roadway and the proposed construction work area by a 
fence. North Baja would implement the following mitigation measures to minimize impacts on the 
Riviera RV Resort during construction within Riviera Drive: 

• North Baja would contact the owners of the resort 2 weeks before the start of 
construction; 

• flag persons would be provided to route traffic around construction equipment and 
obstructions; 

• work would be scheduled during daylight hours unless alternative schedules are 
authorized; 

• access would be maintained to the resort except during actual trenching operations. Steel 
plates would be available to maintain access during periods when the trench is open; 

• one lane of restricted traffic movement would be maintained through the construction 
area. This would allow resort visitors and emergency vehicles reasonable access during 
the construction activities; and 

• during non-work times, the work area would be secured and patrolled to minimize safety 
hazards associated with open trenches, heavy equipment, and other construction 
operations. 

Implementation of these measures would reduce impacts on the Riviera RV Resort to less than 
significant levels. 


4-159 


Informal camping also occurs in other areas near the proposed Project facilities but is variable in 
nature with most of the activity occurring in the winter. The area surrounding the Ogilby Meter Station, 
in particular, is a popular camp site throughout the winter months. Construction-induced effects such as 
traffic, noise, and dust may affect the quality of some campers’ recreational experiences, but any effects 
would be temporary in nature (i.e., considerably less than 1 year) and would not result in any significant 
impacts. 

Hot Springs Long Term Visitor Area 

The Hot Springs Long Term Visitor Area is located about 0.1 mile north of the proposed IID 
Lateral at MP 27.4. The area includes a historic and still active hot spring that attracts both local and 
winter visitors. Construction-induced effects such as traffic, noise, and dust may affect the quality of 
some visitors’ recreational experiences, but any effects would be temporary in nature (i.e., considerably 
less than 1 year) and would not result in any significant impacts. 

4.8.6 Hazardous Waste Sites 

The CEQA process requires the identification of hazardous material sites pursuant to Government 
Code section 65962. The Department of Toxic Substances and Control (DTSC), Site Mitigation Group, 
was contacted regarding the proper approach to identifying hazardous material sites pursuant to the 
CEQA requirements. In order to fulfill these requirements, the CAL-SITES list and leaking underground 
storage tank (LUST) list were reviewed. The CAL-SITES is a database maintained by the DTSC that 
contains potential or confirmed substance release properties and is released quarterly. The LUST list, 
maintained by the CSWRCB, contains an inventory of reported underground storage tank incidents. 

A review of the CAL-SITES database did not identify any sites that are currently on or adjacent 
to the proposed Project. A review of the LUST list revealed a single incident of a leaking underground 
fuel tank along the IID Lateral route in El Centro (case #7T2243030). The case was closed by the 
CRWQCB on August 28, 1992 and is not considered to be an issue for the proposed Project. 

If contamination is encountered during construction of the Project, North Baja would notify the 
appropriate agencies. In addition. North Baja has prepared an SPCC Plan that provides preventive and 
mitigative measures that would be implemented to avoid or minimize the potential impact of hazardous 
material spills during construction (see Appendix F). 

Although not classified as hazardous waste sites, two solid waste facilities and a former livestock 
feed yard are adjacent to the proposed facilities. The Palo Verde Solid Waste Site is 0.1 mile west of the 
proposed B-Line at MP 26.4, and a former solid waste disposal site was adjacent to the proposed 18th 
Avenue Yard near MP 5.5. No impacts on or from these facilities occurred during construction of the 
existing A-Line and no impacts associated with the proposed B-Line are anticipated. 

A former livestock feed yard was located at the proposed 18th Avenue Yard (MPs 5.5 to 5.7). No 
impacts on or from this facility occurred during construction of the existing A-Line and no impacts 
associated with the proposed B-Line are anticipated. 

4.8.7 Aesthetic Resources 

The BLM uses a VRM system to identify and manage scenic values on public lands. The VRM 
system includes a visual resource inventory, which classifies resources on BLM land in one of four 
categories: class I, II, III, or IV, with class I having the highest visual sensitivity and class IV being the 


4-160 


least sensitive. 4 The degree of modification allowed to the basic elements of the landscape in these 
classes includes: 


• class I: modifications should not be evident in the landscape. The level of change to the 
characteristic landscape should be very low and must not attract attention; 

• class II: modifications should not be evident in the landscape. Contrasts are seen, but 
should not attract the attention of the casual observer; 

• class III: modifications are evident, but should remain subordinate to the existing 
landscape; and 

• class IV: modifications may dominate the view and be the focus of viewer attention; 
however, every effort should be made to minimize the impact of these activities. 

Within the Project area, the BLM land in Imperial County under the jurisdiction of the El Centro 
and Yuma Field Offices has been categorized into VRM classes. BLM land along the proposed B-Line in 
Riverside County under the jurisdiction of the Palm Springs-South Coast Field Office has not been 
classified. Accordingly, interim VRM classes have been established for the area crossed by the pipeline 
route in Riverside County. The interim VRM classes are included in the summary above. The supporting 
VRM evaluation establishing these interim VRM classes is provided in Appendix Q. 

Of the 55.2 miles of BLM-managed lands that would be crossed by the B-Line, 24.9 miles are 
VRM class II, 23.5 miles are VRM class III, and 6.8 miles are VRM class IV. Of the 25.7 miles of BLM- 
managed lands that would be crossed by the IID Lateral, 20.8 miles are VRM class II and 4.9 miles are 
VRM class IV. No VRM class I lands would be affected by the proposed Project. 

There are two types of potential impact on visual resources associated with construction and 
operation of the Project facilities: that resulting from alteration of terrain and vegetation patterns due to 
facility construction or right-of-way maintenance and that resulting from the presence of new 
aboveground facilities. 

Pipeline Facilities 

During construction, the cleared and graded right-of-way, as well as construction equipment 
operating on the right-of-way, would be visible from any surrounding residences and local roads. 
Because the terrain over much of the Project area is relatively flat, views of the construction activity may 
extend for some distance. Following construction, the primary visual impact would be the right-of-way, 
which due to the arid climate and slow regeneration of native vegetation could be noticeable for many 
years. The visual impact of the right-of-way following construction depends on the visual contrast in 
form, line, color, and texture created between the proposed facilities and the existing landscape. These 
factors are discussed by facility and milepost below. 

B-Line 


The B-Line would be constructed adjacent to North Baja’s existing A-Line and would result in 
similar impacts on visual resources as those experienced during construction and operation of that 
pipeline. The landscape along the B-Line route is characterized by flat agricultural and rural residential 
areas, playa/alluvial fan landscapes (i.e., flat terrain, creosote scrub vegetation, desert washes), and 


4 A full description of the BLM’s VRM system is available at http://www.blm.gov/nstc/VRM/8410.html . 


4-161 





mountain foothills. Specific segments of the pipeline route fall into one of these general categories as 
described below. 

MPs 0.0 to 11.7 - This portion of the B-Line route comprises flat terrain with a mix of 
agricultural and rural residential landscapes on both sides of 18 th Avenue. Agricultural operations would 
resume following construction. Construction activity would create a short-term visual intrusion to 
residents along 18 lh Avenue. There would be no long-term impact on visual resources in this area because 
little or no vegetation clearing would be required where the B-Line would be installed within the right-of- 
way associated with 18 th Avenue. The Colorado River would be crossed using the HDD method, and 
setbacks from the river would protect existing vegetation. Therefore, views from the river and adjacent 
areas would not be affected. 

Lands within this route segment in the CDCA are not managed by the BLM and do not have a 
VRM classification. Therefore, construction of this segment of the B-Line would not cause an 
inconsistency with an adopted VRM Plan. As described above, construction in this area would also not 
result in a substantial adverse effect on a scenic area or vista, substantially damage scenic resources, or 
substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the area or its surroundings. As a result, 
impacts on visual resources along this segment of the B-Line would be less than significant. 

MPs 11.7 to 22.3 - Past 18th Avenue, the B-Line route joins the Western Area Power 
Administration transmission line corridor and continues south across the Palo Verde Mesa to the Palo 
Verde Mountains foothills. In this flat desert landscape, a low degree of visual impact would occur 
initially and would be further reduced over time. Visibility resulting from the very slight contrast in soil 
color and vegetative pattern between the right-of-way and adjacent areas would be offset by limited 
viewing opportunities afforded by areas with flat to low topographic relief and views that include existing 
manmade features of electric transmission lines. 

The area that would be crossed has an interim VRM classification of IV. The degree of contrast 
with the characteristic landscape that would result from the B-Line would be consistent with the visual 
management objectives of this class. Changes in form, line, color, and texture would be reduced where 
the route would be adjacent to other linear facilities, including the existing electric transmission lines. 
Overall, construction in this area would not result in a substantial adverse effect on a scenic area or vista, 
substantially damage scenic resources, or substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of 
the area or its surroundings. For these reasons, impacts on visual resources along this segment of the B- 
Line would be less than significant. 

MPs 22.3 to 29.7 and MPs 31.5 to 79.8 - South of the Palo Verde Mountains, the surroundings of 
the corridor assume characteristics typical of playa/alluvial fan landscapes until the route reaches the 
intersection of Ogilby Road and Interstate 8. At that point, the route heads southeast through the Pilot 
Knob Mesa to the U.S.-Mexico border, adjacent to the sand dune system that dominates the surrounding 
visual setting and contributes to a moderate to high landscape quality. 

In the desert landscape environment of these two route segments, a low degree of visual impact 
would occur initially and would be further reduced over time. Visibility resulting from the contrast in soil 
color and vegetative pattern between the right-of-way and adjacent areas would be partially offset by 
limited viewing afforded by areas with flat to low relief and views that include existing manmade 
features. Adjacent features along most of the length of these segments include paved and desert wash 
roads, levees, canals, and electric transmission lines. Over time, the contrast would diminish and the 
visual effect of the installed pipeline would be minimal. 


4-162 





The BLM lands along these two segments of the route include VRM class II and VRM class III. 
The degree of contrast with the characteristic landscape that would result from the B-Line would be 
consistent with the visual management objectives of these classes. Changes in form, line, color, and 
texture would be reduced where the route would be adjacent to other linear facilities. Overall, 
construction in this area would not result in a substantial adverse effect on a scenic area or vista, 
substantially damage scenic resources, or substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of 
the area or its surroundings. For these reasons, impacts on visual resources along these segments of the 
B-Line would be less than significant. 

MPs 29.7 to 31.5 - In this segment of the route, the B-Line would cross hilly to flat terrain with a 
backdrop created by the steeper slopes of the Palo Verde Mountains to the west. Potential viewing 
locations include SR 78, which is parallel to a portion of the route in this segment. Few longitudinal 
views down North Baja’s existing right-of-way occur in this area. Glimpses of the existing right-of-way 
can be seen while traveling on SR 78, but the dominant feature is the mid-distance views of the Colorado 
River bottom covered by expanses of tamarisk. The highway alignment in this area is curvilinear with 
vertical changes in grade. A single lane exists in either direction. All of these features compete with the 
viewer’s attention. 

Lands in this route segment are VRM class III. The degree of contrast with the characteristic 
landscape that would result from the B-Line would be consistent with the visual management objectives 
of this class. Overall, construction in this area would not result in a substantial adverse effect on a scenic 
area or vista, substantially damage scenic resources, or substantially degrade the existing visual character 
or quality of the area or its surroundings. As a result, impacts on visual resources along this segment of 
the B-Line would be less than significant. 

BEI Lateral 


The BEI Lateral is located between the Colorado River and Interstate 10. The terrain is flat and 
uniform. The land is not irrigated and not in active agriculture. Construction activity would be a short¬ 
term visual intrusion to residents along Riviera Drive. There would be no long-term impact on visual 
resources in this area because little or no vegetation clearing would be required where the lateral would be 
installed within the right-of-way associated with Riviera Drive. 

Lands along the BEI Lateral are not managed by the BLM and do not have a VRM classification. 
Therefore, construction of the B-Line would not cause an inconsistency with an adopted VRM Plan. 
Construction in this area would also not result in a substantial adverse effect on a scenic area or vista, 
substantially damage scenic resources, or substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of 
the area or its surroundings. As a result, impacts on visual resources associated with the BEI Lateral 
would be less than significant. 

IID Lateral 


The IID Lateral would be constructed within or adjacent to existing rights-of-way for the majority 
of the route. The landscape along the IID Lateral route is characterized by sand dunes, playa/alluvial fan 
landscapes (i.e., flat terrain, creosote scrub vegetation, desert washes), and agricultural areas. Specific 
segments of the lateral route fall into one of these general categories as described below. 

MPs 0.0 to MP 7.9 - This portion of the IID Lateral would cross the ISDRA, which contains the 
largest mass of sand dunes in California. The ISDRA is recognized for its frequent use as a backdrop for 
commercials and movies because of its unique beauty and landscape. Very little vegetation is present due 
to intense OHV use. Manmade modifications in the vicinity of the IID Lateral in this area include 


4-163 






Interstate 8, the All-American Canal, the Coachella Canal, and several wood-pole and steel-lattice-tower 
electric transmission lines that traverse the dunes in an east-west direction. 

The BLM lands along this segment of the route include VRM class II and VRM class IV. The 
degree of contrast with the characteristic landscape that would result from the IID Lateral would be 
consistent with the visual management objectives of these classes. Changes in form, line, color, and 
texture would be reduced where the route would be adjacent to other linear facilities. Moreover, wind- 
deposited sand is expected to mask most remaining visual evidence of the right-of-way within a relatively 
short period following construction. Overall, construction in this area would not result in a substantial 
adverse effect on a scenic area or vista, substantially damage scenic resources, or substantially degrade 
the existing visual character or quality of the area or its surroundings. For these reasons, impacts on 
visual resources along this segment of the IID Lateral would be less than significant. 

MPs 7.9 to 27.6 - The landscapes that would be crossed by the IID Lateral through this area 
include desert environments adjacent to or within manmade features such as Evan Hewes Highway and 
other Imperial County roadways as well as electric transmission lines. In the desert landscape 
environment of this route segment, a low degree of visual impact would occur initially and would be 
further reduced over time. Visibility resulting from the contrast in soil color and vegetative pattern 
between the right-of-way and adjacent areas would be partially offset by limited viewing afforded by 
areas with flat to low relief and views that include existing manmade features. Over time, the contrast 
would diminish and the visual effect of the installed pipeline would be minimal. 

The BLM lands along this segment of the route include VRM class EL The degree of contrast 
with the characteristic landscape that would result from the IID Lateral would be consistent with the 
visual management objectives of this class. Changes in form, line, color, and texture would be reduced 
where the route would be adjacent to other linear facilities. Overall, construction in this area would not 
result in a substantial adverse effect on a scenic area or vista, substantially damage scenic resources, or 
substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the area or its surroundings. For these 
reasons, impacts on visual resources along this segment of the IID Lateral would be less than significant. 

MPs 27.6 to 45.7 - This portion of the IID Lateral comprises flat terrain with a mix of agricultural 
and rural residential landscapes on both sides of several Imperial County roadways. Agricultural 
operations in these areas would resume following construction. Construction activity would be a short¬ 
term visual intrusion to residents along the roadways. There would be no long-term impact on visual 
resources in this area because little or no vegetation clearing would be required where the lateral would be 
installed within the road rights-of-way. 

Lands within this route segment in the CDCA are not managed by the BLM and do not have a 
VRM classification. Therefore, construction of this segment of the IID Lateral w'ould not cause an 
inconsistency with an adopted VRM Plan. Construction in this area would also not result in a substantial 
adverse effect on a scenic area or vista, substantially damage scenic resources, or substantially degrade 
the existing visual character or quality of the area or its surroundings. As a result, impacts on visual 
resources along this segment of the IID Lateral would be less than significant. 

Aboveground Facilities 

The area near the Ehrenberg Compressor Station has a mix of industrial and rural landscape 
characteristics. During modifications at the station, the presence of construction workers and equipment 
in the Project area would be a minor detraction. All modifications at the facility would be at or near 
ground level and would be visually unobtrusive. Because the facility is not on BLM land, it does not 
have a VRM classification. 


4-164 




The proposed Blythe Meter Station would be adjacent to the proposed realigned Riviera Drive 
and about 1,000 feet from the nearest residence. Because the site is not on BLM land, it does not have a 
VRM classification. 

Rannells Trap is within an open scrub-shrub desert landscape near the boundary of the 
agricultural area of the Palo Verde Valley to the east. The facility would be expanded by 0.3 acre to 
accommodate the new pig launcher and receiver. The land for this facility is not managed by the BLM 
and does not have a VRM classification. 

The existing Ogilby Meter Station is on flat terrain within an open scrub-shrub desert landscape. 
This site is on land managed by the BLM and has a VRM designation of class II. The modifications, 
odorant facility, and additional pig launcher and receiver at the Ogilby Meter Station would require an 
expansion of the facility by 0.4 acre for both construction and operation. The modified structure would 
be visible to travelers on Interstate 8 but it would be seen in the context of the existing facility as well as 
other manmade structures such as electric transmission lines. The degree of contrast would not attract 
attention and would be consistent with the visual management objectives for VRM class II areas. 

Four new valves associated with the B-Line would be collocated with existing valves along the 
A-Line. No new permanent right-of-way would be required for these valves, except for valve #2 along 
18th Avenue. This valve would require a 12-foot by 24-foot expansion of the existing fenced site. The 
land for this expanded valve is not managed by the BLM and does not have a VRM classification. The 
other five valves would be within the sites of the Ehrenberg Compressor Station, Rannells Trap, and 
Ogilby Meter Station and would not result in any additional impacts on visual resources. 

The tap at the B-Line and pig launcher for the IID Lateral would require an 80-foot by 100-foot 
site for construction and operation. The land for this facility is managed by the BLM and has a VRM 
classification of II. The degree of change associated with this facility would be consistent with the visual 
management objectives of this class. 

The proposed El Centro Meter Station and pig receiver would be installed within the existing 
fenceline of the El Centro Power Generating Station. Its appearance would be consistent with the existing 
character of the area and would result in only a minor change in the visual landscape. Because the facility 
is not on BLM land, it does not have a VRM classification. 

One of the four new valves associated with the IID Lateral would be collocated with the tap at the 
B-Line and pig launcher as discussed above. The three remaining valves along the IID Lateral would 
each require 10-foot by 25-foot fenced sites within North Baja’s permanent right-of-way. The valves at 
MPs 7.6 and 27.2 would be on BLM land with a VRM classification of II. The degree of change 
associated with these facilities would be consistent with the visual management objectives of this class. 
The valve at MP 38.7 would not be on land managed by the BLM and does not have a VRM 
classification. 

Construction of the new aboveground facilities would have a permanent impact on visual 
resources. Modifications at the existing aboveground facilities would result in an incremental increase in 
impacts on visual resources but would generally be minor because of the presence of the existing 
facilities. Overall, for those facilities on BLM land, the degree of contrast with the characteristic 
landscape resulting from each of the facilities would be consistent with the visual management objectives 
of the affected classes. In addition, North Baja would paint the new or additional facilities so they would 
blend with the surrounding landscape. Construction of these facilities would not result in a substantial 
adverse effect on a scenic area or vista, substantially damage scenic resources, or substantially degrade 
the existing visual character or quality of the area or its surroundings. 


4-165 


Security lighting at the aboveground facilities would be low sodium vapor light that would be 
angled toward the interior of the station. Some small floodlights would be used at the sites but they 
would not create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime 
views in the area. 

For these reasons, impacts on visual resources associated with the aboveground facilities would 
be less than significant. 

Pipe Storage and Contractor Yards 

With the possible exception of minor grading activities and surfacing, soils at the pipe storage and 
contractor yards would not be disturbed. As a result, there would be no permanent impacts on visual 
resources associated with the use of these yards. 

Access Roads 

North Baja proposes to use several existing roads for temporary right-of-way access during 
construction. These access roads are primarily paved or dirt roads and/or jeep trails that would be graded 
or otherwise improved as needed to move equipment and materials to the construction right-of-way. 
Because these are existing roads, these activities would not result in significant impacts on visual 
resources. 

Approximately 1,150 feet of new temporary access roads would be required for the Project, of 
which about 265 feet would be retained as permanent access to the proposed Blythe Meter Station, 400 
feet would be retained as permanent access to the modified Ogilby Meter Station and odorant facility, and 
160 feet would be retained as permanent access to the proposed tap at the B-Line and pig launcher at the 
beginning of the IID Lateral. A permanent access road would also be required to proposed valve #2 at 
MP 7.6 of the IID Lateral but North Baja would utilize existing roads with some modification and would 
not need to construct a new road. The land associated with the new permanent access road to the Blythe 
Meter Station is not managed by the BLM and does not have a VRM classification. The lands associated 
with the new permanent access roads to the modified Ogilby Meter Station and odorant facility and the 
proposed tap at the B-Line and pig launcher at the beginning of the IID Lateral are managed by the BLM 
and have a VRM classification of II. The degree of change associated with these new roads would be 
consistent with the visual management objectives of this class. Overall, no significant impacts on visual 
resources associated with these access roads are anticipated. 

4.8.8 Arrowhead Alternative 

Construction of the Arrowhead Alternative would disturb approximately 24.3 acres of land, of 
which approximately 6.2 acres would be permanently retained. Table 4.8.8-1 summarizes the acres of 
each land use that would be affected by construction and operation of the Arrowhead Alternative. 


4-166 


TABLE 4.8.8-1 

Land Use Affected by Construction and Operation of the Arrowhead Alternative 


Agricultural Land a Anthropogenic Land b Open Land c Total 

(acres) (acres) (acres) (acres) 


Facility 

Const. 

Oper. 

Const. 

Oper. 

Const. 

Oper. 

Const. 

Oper. 

Pipeline Facilities 









Pipeline Right-of-Way 

13.4 

4.7 

7.2 

0.0 

0.0 

0.0 

20.6 

4.7 

Temporary Extra Workspace 

1.7 

0.0 

0.0 

0.0 

0.0 

0.0 

1.7 

0.0 

Pipeline Facilities Subtotal 

15.1 

4.7 

7.2 

0.0 

0.0 

0.0 

22.3 

4.7 

Aboveground Facilities 

1.0 

0.8 

1.0 

0.7 

0.0 

0.0 

2.0 

1.5 

Arrowhead Alternative Total 

16.1 

5.5 

8.2 

0.7 

0.0 

0.0 

24.3 

6.2 


Agricultural land includes cropland, which typically consists of alfalfa, wheat, cotton, and irrigated pasture, and, to a lesser 
extent, vegetable truck crops. 

Anthropogenic land includes paved roadways (i.e., Arrowhead Boulevard) as well as road crossings and other 
industrial/commercial/utility uses. 

Open land includes undeveloped, desert scrub-shrub lands, and wetlands. 

Const. = Construction 
Oper. = Operation 


Of the 2.1-mile-long Arrowhead Alternative, 1.0 mile would be within the county road right-of- 
way associated with Arrowhead Boulevard and 1.1 miles would be on new right-of-way across privately 
owned land. The Blythe-Arrowhead Meter Station and pig receiver would occupy a 160-foot by 200-foot 
site within the fenced yard of the existing Blythe Compressor Station. The pig launcher, taps, and 
crossover piping to the existing A-Line and proposed B-Line would be located in a 150-foot by 225-foot 
fenced yard on privately owned land in the northeast corner of the intersection of 18 th Avenue and 
Arrowhead Boulevard. No pipe storage and contractor yards or access roads would be required for 
construction or operation of the Arrowhead Alternative. 

There are no residences or businesses located within 100 feet of the Arrowhead Alternative. The 
closest residence, at MP 1.2, is approximately 126 feet from the edge of the anticipated constmction right- 
of-way. Based on contact with county planning officials and landowners, North Baja is not aware of any 
planned developments that would affect current land uses near the Arrowhead Alternative. 

The Arrowhead Alternative would not affect any special management areas or other recreational 
and public interest areas. A review of the CAL-SITES database and LUST list did not identify any 
hazardous material sites on or adjacent to the Arrowhead Alternative. 

The route associated with the Arrowhead Extension would cross flat terrain with a mix of 
agricultural and rural residential landscapes on both sides of Arrowhead Boulevard. Agricultural 
operations would resume following construction. Construction activity would create a short-term visual 
intrusion along Arrowhead Boulevard. There would be no long-term impact on visual resources in this 
area because little or no vegetation clearing would be required where the pipeline would be installed 
within the right-of-way associated with Arrowhead Boulevard, and agricultural operations would resume 
following construction where the pipeline would be outside the road right-of-way. The lands affected by 
the Arrowhead Alternative are not managed by the BLM and do not have a VRM classification. 

The Blythe-Arrowhead Meter Station and pig receiver would be constructed in the existing utility 
yard associated with the Blythe Compressor Station. Its appearance would be consistent with the existing 


4-167 







character of the area and would result in only a minor change in the visual landscape. Locating the meter 
station within the existing compressor station would avoid the minor visual impact associated with the 
proposed Blythe Meter Station at the Riviera Drive location. The pig launcher and portions of the valves 
would be the only aboveground structures at the site in the northeast corner of the intersection of 18 th 
Avenue and Arrowhead Boulevard. The pig launcher would extend approximately 6 to 8 feet above the 
surface, the valve steam operator would be 5 feet in height, and a blowdown silencer would be about 6 to 
8 feet in height. After construction, each facility would be painted to blend with the surrounding 
landscape. 

4.8.9 No Project Alternative 

Under the No Project Alternative, the FERC would deny North Baja’s application for a 
Certificate and a Presidential Permit amendment, the CSLC would deny North Baja’s application for an 
amendment to its right-of-way lease across California’s Sovereign and School Lands, and the BLM would 
deny North Baja’s application to amend its existing Right-of-Way Grant and obtain a Temporary Use 
Permit for the portion of the Project on Federal lands. The No Project Alternative means that the Project 
would not go forward and the Project-related facilities would not be installed. Accordingly, none of the 
potential environmental impacts identified for the construction and operation of the proposed Project 
would occur. 

Because the proposed Project is privately funded, it is unknown whether North Baja would fund 
another energy project in California. However, should the No Project Alternative be selected, the energy 
needs identified in Section 1.1 would likely be addressed through other means, such as through other 
LNG or natural gas-related pipeline projects. Such projects may result in potential environmental impacts 
of the nature and magnitude of the proposed Project as well as impacts particular to their respective 
configurations and operations; however, these impacts cannot be predicted with any certainty at this time. 


4-168 


4.9 SOCIOECONOMICS 


The socioeconomic study area considered for this analysis includes La Paz County, Arizona, and 
Riverside and Imperial Counties, California. Socioeconomic information is presented based on county- 
level census data for La Paz and Imperial Counties. With the exception of tax revenues, information for 
Riverside County is based on data from Congressional District 45, which encompasses the eastern portion 
of the county. Because the western portion of the county is more densely populated, data from 
Congressional District 45 are more reflective of the Project area than data from all of Riverside County. 

4.9.1 Significance Criteria 

An adverse socioeconomic impact would be considered significant and would require mitigation 
if Project construction or operation would: 

• cause a permanent population increase of 3 percent or more in a county affected by the 
Project; 

• cause the vacancy rate for temporary housing to fall to less than 5 percent; or 

• increase the short- or long-term demand for public services in excess of existing and 
projected capacities. 

4.9.2 Population, Economy, and Employment 

All three counties are sparsely populated in the vicinity of the proposed Project. Within the study 
area. Congressional District 45 (within Riverside County) has the highest population and density; 
however, this is due to the significantly higher population density in the western half of the district. Table 
4.9.2-1 provides a summary of selected demographic and socioeconomic statistics for Arizona and 
California and each of the counties where Project facilities are proposed. 

The counties within the study area experienced small to moderate population growth between 
2000 and 2004. The population within La Paz County increased by only 0.9 percent, which is 
significantly lower than the 12.0 percent population increase for the State of Arizona. Within California, 
Imperial County experienced population growth of 7.1 percent and Riverside County (Congressional 
District 45) experienced population growth of 14.7 percent. Both of these growth rates are higher than 
the overall growth rate for the State of California (6.0 percent). 

Table 4.9.2-2 identifies the anticipated workforce and construction schedule for the facilities 
associated with the Project. Due to the specialized nature of pipeline construction, North Baja expects to 
hire most construction personnel from outside the study area. Based on the brief construction period, and 
the small number of workers who brought their families during construction of the A-Line, North Baja 
anticipates that most non-local construction workers would not be accompanied by their families. North 
Baja estimates that the peak workforce would be between 300 and 400 workers during construction of the 
B-Line in late 2009. During this phase of construction, 240 to 320 workers are expected to temporarily 
relocate to the Project area. Based on the current population size within the study area, and the relatively 
small number of construction workers who would temporarily relocate to the area, impacts on the 
population numbers in the Project area would be minor and short term. 


4-169 


Existing Socioeconomic Conditions in the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project Study Area 

Population 

Population_ Density a _ Per Capita Income civilian Labor Unemployment 


c n 
0 ) 
'l. 

to 

3 

“O 

c 


c 

a) 

E ^ 

i§ 

E 

UJ 

o 

§ 


CL 

O 


CO 

a) 

o 

0 ) 

0 

1 

o 

o 

co 

T3 

c 

CO 


CO 

CD 

sz 

To 

c 

o 


CO — 


"O 

LU 


c 

CD 

2 ^ 
CD O 
OjO 

"^cm 

CD 

-4—> 

03 

DC 


CD ,*■ 

a o 

o o 

U_ CM 


CO 

O 

O 

CM 


<3) 

D) 

CT) 


•'t 

O 

o 

CM 


O 

o 

o 

CM 


2 CO 
CD -C 
CL O 


■M" 

O 

o 

CM 


O 

o 


o 

CM 


c 

3 

O 

O 

B 

To 

to 


o 

in 


CM 

5 

cm" 

CO 

cm" 


CM 

CO 

CM 

K 

CM 

CO 


CO 

N- 

CM 

o' 

CM 

CO 


LO 

o 

LO 


m 

o- 


CM 


co 

00 

co" 

■cf 

h~ 

id 


CM 

co 

CO 

o' 

CO 

in 


C0 

c 

o 

N 


CO CO 
CD CD 
O O 

£ £ 

CD CD 


— co co 


co 

CD 


CO CO 


T3 

_ o 
o o 

CD 

*“ X) 

•4-T C 

C CO 
CD 

c 


o 

o 

CO 

TD 

c 

CO 


o 

o 

CO 

T3 

c 

CO 


: CO CO 


CO 

CD 

o 

s 

CD 

CO 

To 

o 

o 

CO 

T3 

c 

cO 


CO 


CO 

CD 

o 

s 

CD 

CO 

0 

'o 

o 

CO 

TO 

c 

CO 


CO 



5 .2 

VI/ 

VI/ 

O) 





0 

TO 

0 

w 

1- 

"0 0 

€ P 
0 o 

c £ 

“c6 

c 

o 

“co 

c 

o 

_c 

*k— 

3 

O 

To 

c 

o 

0 

TO 

0 

To 

c 

o 

0 
TO 
0 
i _ 

1- 


© e 

"S 

"c3 


To 

_ 

0 

— 

To 

4-4 

» 8 
“ o 

o 

13 

o 

3 

3 

C 

o 

3 

"0 
-*— * 

o 

3 

"0 
-*— * 

© 

"O 

TD 

03 

TO 

0 

TO 

0 

cc 

< 0 

LU 

UJ 


LU 

CC 

LU 

CC 

CM 

T-I 

c\i 

T” 

CM 


CM 

T“ 

CM 


1 ^ 

cd 


in 

rC 

d 


N 

CO 

CL 

co 


CM 

cd 



o 


o 

O 

CO 

O 

cm' 

in 

CM 

r--' 

m 


N-' 


T " 

co 

in 

in 


CD 


oo 

co' 


CO 


CO 

CD 

T _ 

X— 

1 

03 

r^- 


cm' 


cm 


co 




o 


co 


CM 


CM 






CM 

03 

O 

o 

d 


O) 


CO 


a) 

•'T 

co_ 

°o 

cd 

co 


co 

"c 

o 


oo 

in 


oo 

5) 

cd 

CM 

co 


o 

CM 

cm" 

CM 

co 


co 

CM 

C7) 

CO 

cq 

CM 

CM 


C3) 

cd 

o 


I"-; 


00 

00 

o 

CO) 

CO 

CD 


CD 

"co 

1_ 

CD 

> 


o 

o 

O) 

CO) 

in 


■'3' 

h- 

CD 

o 

CM 

co 


CO) 

CO 

CM 

co' 

tn 


in 

cd 

co 


'O’ 

CO 


00 

03 

LO 

00 

r^ 

IT) 

■M* 

03 

00 

CO 

CO 



03 

CM 

c\T 

03 

00 

CO 

LO 


in 




CD 

CO 

cm' 


CO 


CD 

CL 

E 


= cc = 

CO 

O 


CO 

CD 


CD 

i_ 

CO 

3 

CT 

CO 

CM 

cd 

I"- 

O) 

in 

m 


co 

"c 

o 

To 

O 

To 

© 

E 

2 

co 

3 

CO¬ 

CO 

00 

in 

d, 
TT w 

^ CD 
C 
3 
O 
O 

N 
CO 

Q_ 


CO 

CD 


^ "2 
° 5 

o co 
CM —I 

O? 
03 


0 
u. 
0 
3 

cr 
(/) 
0 T- 

Lo 

Id 

2 c 

0 3 

3 O 
CJO 
0 __ 
C\J 

3 I 

d E 
co — 

^ ~o 

c 

a 

0 

o w 
§ _g 
<E 

a £ 

CD CO 
!= 3 
CO ©- 

"O w 

5 05 
B o> 

TO 

c co) 
co m" 

C i 

.2 m 

0 2 

3 O 
CL‘3 

S..2 

C Q 

° To 
c 
o 


c 

3 

o 

O 

CD 

-g 

‘co 

i_ 

CD 

> 

ir 


o >_ 

C O 

•11 
8 . ® 
c .2 


CO 
CD 

To .2 
E « 

CO 

LU o 
co' ^ 
© 2 
g’d: 
O c 

>_ CO 
O c 
CO 


(D co rr 

■“ LU LL 


B io 
8 3 

u- >• 

IS 


CO 

CO 

0 

0 

O 


c .2 


u 


0 

0 


0 


CO 

•4—< 

o 

£5 

O 

3 

o 

> 


^2 
> Q 

W ® 

2? .2 
0 
0 
0 


O 

0 


c 

D 

o O 
£ -g 
0 0 


CO) 

o O 


cog 

C 0 CM 
0 V 
o t o 


<D. m B 


CO 0 

co cn 

co 

0 co 

CL 3 

E « 

8 ® 

c O 

© (D 

-c £ 
2 C- 
d o 

§ 3 

in" 8 

2 3 

To CQ 


© 

E 0 

< O 

cd co" 
3 3 
0 0 
c c 
0 0 
O O 
0 0 


0 
-4—< 

C 
3 
O 
o 
o 
< 


o o 


TO 

0 

0 

0 

-Q 

0 


0 


"0 O 


O - UJ — 

0 T; 


0 

C 

o 

'0 

0 

© 


g 

E 
o 
c 
o 
o 
LU 

3 3 Trt 
0 0C 

2 2 o 

3 3 O) 

CD CD 0 

0* ©' ^ 
2 2 co 
© © '0 

E -s 

M 


E 
E 

o _ 
O O 


0 

3 

>_ o 
© O 
^ © 
0 T3 

o 2 
0 0 
0 > 
CL CC 


CO) 

c c 


o o o 


o 

o 


0 
E 
■5 
0 
CL 
0 
Q 

Q- rd 

CC =) 


c 

0 

0 

0 


c c 
0 0 
EE. 
•e tc lu 

0 0 *4— 
CL CL O 
© 0 
Q Q 0 


CD CO hj 
0 3 CD 


in 

o 

o 

CM 

*-• 

c 

0 

E 

•s 

0 

Q. 

0 

Q 

-4—* 

c 

CD 

E 

CL 

o 

0 

> 

0 

Q 

•4—» 

c 

CD 

E 

>4 

o 

CL 

E 

LU 


0 

0 

o 

k_ 

3 

o 

CO 


4-170 








TABLE 4.9.2-2 


Anticipated Construction Workforce for the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 



Approximate 


Construction 

Anticipated Workforce 


Facility 

Mileposts 

Time Period 

Duration 

Local 

Non-local 

County/State 

BEI Lateral, 

Blythe Meter 

Station, 

Aboveground 

Facility 

Modifications 

Various 

2007 

2 months 

10 

40 

La Paz, AZ 
Riverside, CA 

Imperial, CA 

B-Line 

0.5 to 79.8 

Late 2009 

4 to 6 months 

60 to 80 

240 to 320 

Riverside, CA 
Imperial, CA 

IID Lateral 

0.0 to 13.7 

Summer/Fall 2008 

2 to 3 months 

20 to 30 

80 to 120 

Imperial, CA 


13.7 to 45.7 

Late 2008/early 2009 

3 to 4 months 

20 to 30 

80 to 120 

Imperial, CA 


Because North Baja currently operates an existing pipeline system in the Project area, no 
additional permanent employees would be required. Personnel from North Baja’s existing staff would 
assume operation and maintenance of the new facilities as part of their existing routine workload. 
Therefore, the Project would not cause a permanent population increase in any of the affected counties. 

Annual per capita income in 2003 (estimated) was lower in all three counties that would be 
affected by the proposed Project than the respective State averages ($27,232 in Arizona and $33,415 in 
California), ranging from $18,653 in La Paz County to $22,201 in Riverside County (Congressional 
District 45). Educational, health, and social services rank as the largest employment industries in both 
Arizona and California and in two of the three affected counties (see Table 4.9.2-1). In La Paz County, 
accommodations and food services are the top industries by employment, reflecting the importance and 
impact of tourism relative to other economic sectors in that county. 

Unemployment rates in the three counties affected by the Project ranged from 5.8 percent in 
Riverside County to 17.1 percent in Imperial County. North Baja anticipates that up to 80 local workers 
would be employed during the peak construction period of the Project (construction of the B-Line). 
Given the relatively high unemployment rates in the study area, sufficient numbers of local workers are 
expected to be available for construction of the Project. 

During the three phases of construction (see Table 4.9.2-2), North Baja estimates that the total 
Project payroll would be about $50,000,000, a portion of which would be spent locally for the purchase of 
housing, food, gasoline, and entertainment. These direct payroll expenditures would have a beneficial 
impact on local economies. 

4.9.3 Housing 

Housing characteristics within the study area are presented in Tables 4.9.3-1 and 4.9.3-2. Table 
4.9.3-1 presents an overview of the total housing units, including owner- and renter-occupied units, 
median value and monthly rental rates, and vacancy rates in the study area. Table 4.9.3-2 lists the number 
of units available for temporary use. All three counties have lower median rents and higher rental 
vacancy rates than their respective State averages. 


4-171 






TABLE 4.9.3-1 

2000 Housing Characteristics in the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project Study Area 


State/County 

Total 

Housing 

Units 

Owner 

Occupied 

(percent) 

Renter 

Occupied 

(percent) 

Median 

Value, 

Owner 

Occupied 

Units 

Median 

Gross 

Monthly 

Rent 

Owner 

Vacancy 

Rate 

(percent) 

Rental 

Vacancy 

Rate 

(percent) 

Arizona 

2,189,189 

68 

32 

$121,3000 

$619 

2.1 

9.2 

La Paz 

15,133 

78 

22 

$86,500 

$442 

3.7 

14.8 

California 

12,214,549 

56.9 

43.1 

$211,500 

$747 

1.4 

3.7 

Riverside a 

278,037 

69.2 

30.8 

$138,400 

$644 

3.0 

9.0 

Imperial 

43,891 

58.3 

41.7 

$100,000 

$504 

1.4 

4.9 


Represents Congressional District 45, which encompasses the Project area in the eastern portion of Riverside County. 
Source: U.S. Department of Congress, Bureau of the Census 2000 State and County Quickfacts. 


TABLE 4.9.3-2 


2000 Temporary Housing Characteristics in the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project Study Area 


State/County 

Units for Rent 

Vacant for Seasonal, 
Recreational, or Occasional 
Use 

Vacant for Migrant 
Workers 

Other Vacant 

Arizona 

61,781 

141,965 

636 

43,026 

La Paz 

320 

5,237 

31 

856 

California 

190,321 

236,857 

2,205 

139,253 

Riverside a 

3,054 

2,865 

2 

1,019 

Imperial 

842 

2,081 

38 

997 


Represents Congressional District 45, which encompasses the Project area in the eastern portion of Riverside County. 
Source: U.S. Department of Congress, Bureau of the Census 2000, Vacant Housing Units. 


Temporary housing availability varies seasonally and geographically within the counties and the 
few communities crossed by the proposed pipeline facilities. Temporary housing is least available during 
the winter, when residents of northern states come to take advantage of the warmer weather. There is less 
demand for temporary housing during the hot summer months. Reflecting the importance of tourism in 
La Paz County, there are nearly twice as many units available for seasonal, recreational, or occasional use 
than in either Riverside or Imperial Counties. 

In the study area, temporary housing is available in the form of apartments as well as daily, 
weekly, and monthly rentals in motels, hotels, campgrounds, and rooming houses. The Quartzsite area 
east of Ehrenberg, Arizona, for example, has more than 50 RV and mobile home parks that help 
accommodate more than 1 million visitors each year (Quartzsite Chamber of Commerce 2004). 
Additionally, temporary housing is available in Yuma, Arizona, which lies about 10 miles southeast of 
the terminus of the B-Line in Yuma County, Arizona. 

Construction of the Project could affect the availability of temporary housing in the Project area. 
However, because the construction periods for the proposed phases of the Project are relatively short, and 
because most non-local workers are expected to come alone without their families due to the temporary 
nature of the relocations, most workers are likely to use hotels, motels, apartments, and campgrounds 
within commuting distance of the Project area. Non-local workers should be able to locate temporary 
housing in the Blythe area; in the campgrounds and RV parks east of Ehrenberg; or near Yuma. 


4-172 










Assuming that local construction workers do not require housing, up to 320 housing units may be 
required for the non-local workers. Previous pipeline experience, including construction of the A-Line in 
2002, suggests that non-local workers typically select a variety of temporary housing accommodations, 
with approximately 30 percent providing their own housing units (i.e., travel trailers or RV campers). 
Given the vacancy rates in the area and the number of seasonal, recreational, or occasional use units 
available, construction crews should not encounter difficulty in finding temporary housing and would not 
cause the vacancy rate for temporary housing to fall to less than 5 percent in La Paz or Riverside 
Counties. Although the vacancy rate for temporary housing in Imperial County is currently about 5 
percent, this rate is unlikely to change due to construction. Based on previous experience during 
construction of the A-Line, most non-local workers temporarily relocating to the southern portion of the 
Project area would likely find housing near Yuma. In addition, construction of the portion of the IID 
Lateral that would cross the ISDRA would occur during the summer, when the availability of temporary 
housing is at its highest. Therefore, construction of the Project would not significantly affect the Imperial 
County vacancy rate. As a result, impacts on housing associated with the proposed Project would be less 
than significant. 

4.9.4 Public Services 

A wide range of public services and facilities are offered in Ehrenberg and Yuma, Arizona (at the 
origin of the proposed B-Line and about 10 miles southeast of the terminus of the B-Line, respectively) 
and in Blythe and El Centro, California (near MP 5.0 of the proposed B-Line and at the western terminus 
of the proposed IID Lateral, respectively). Available services and facilities include emergency services 
(e.g., full-service law enforcement, fire departments, emergency response services, and hospitals), utilities 
and public service systems (e.g., water and sewer services), solid waste disposal, and schools. Public 
services potentially affected by the Project are discussed below. 

Emergency Services 

Emergency services for the Project would be provided by a combination of State, county, and 
local departments. In the area near the Ehrenberg Compressor Station, emergency fire and medical 
services are provided by the Ehrenberg Fire Department, with ambulance service dispatched from 
Quartzsite, Arizona. Dispatch services are provided by the La Paz County Sheriffs Department (La Paz 
County Sheriffs Department 2004). In portions of Riverside County and northern Imperial County, 
emergency services are provided by the Blythe Police and Fire Departments. In areas of Riverside 
County that do not have a city fire department, fire and medical emergency services are provided 
primarily by the California Department of Forestry. In Imperial County, the Imperial County Fire 
Department provides fire and medical emergency services. Emergency personnel and vehicles can be 
dispatched from El Centro, Palo Verde, Winterhaven, Brawley, Holtville, or a number of other locations 
within Imperial County depending on the nature and exact location of the emergency. Services can be 
dispatched through the sheriffs office, California Highway Patrol, El Centro Police Department, or other 
entities depending upon where the emergency call originates (Capitol Impact 2005). 

Because the non-local workforce would be small relative to the current population, construction 
of the pipeline facilities would result in minor, temporary, or no impact on local community facilities and 
services such as police, fire, and medical services. Local communities have adequate infrastructure and 
community services to meet the needs of the non-local workers that would be required for the Project. 
Other construction-related demands on local agencies could include increased enforcement activities 
associated with issuing permits for vehicle load and width limits, local police assistance during 
construction at road crossings to facilitate traffic flow, and emergency medical services to treat injuries 
resulting from construction accidents. North Baja would work with local firefighters and other 
emergency responders to coordinate activities for effective emergency response and would develop an 


4-173 


Emergency Response Plan (see Section 4.14.2). As part of the Emergency Response Plan, North Baja 
would establish and maintain communications with local fire, police, and public officials and would make 
personnel, equipment, tools, and materials available at the scene of an emergency. The degree of impact 
on public services would vary from community to community depending on the number of non-local 
workers (and accompanying family members, if any, as previously indicated) that temporarily reside in 
each community, how long they stay, and the size of the community. Although these factors are too 
variable to accurately predict the severity of the impact, the effects would be short term and would not be 
in excess of existing and projected capabilities and are therefore not significant. 

Utilities and Public Service Systems 

During construction, the Project would require the temporary use of water for hydrostatic testing 
of the pipelines, but the water would not be permanently removed from the supply system. North Baja 
would also withdraw water for dust control during construction. This water would be procured from 
irrigation districts, North Baja’s own water sources, or other local water purveyors (see Section 4.3.3.4). 
The Project has no wastewater treatment requirements and would not require construction of new or 
expanded wastewater facilities, or stormwater drainage facilities that could cause significant 
environmental effects. 

North Baja would consult with the local governments as well as the Underground Service Alert of 
Southern California before construction to establish the precise locations of underground utilities along 
the proposed pipeline and lateral routes. All water delivery systems, water wells, water lines, and 
underground utilities would be clearly marked and would be avoided during construction; however, if 
these facilities are encountered, the required separations would be maintained by North Baja. In the event 
that any of these facilities are inadvertently affected during construction, North Baja would immediately 
notify the utility operator so that repairs could be made promptly. 

Operation of the Project would have no additional permanent water supply needs and would not 
require the construction or expansion of wastewater or stormwater facilities. North Baja would comply 
with all Federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to wastewater and stormwater. 

Because the Project would not increase the short- or long-term demand for these services in 
excess of existing and projected capabilities, any impacts associated with these facilities would be less 
than significant. 

Solid Waste 

Construction of the Project would generate modest amounts of solid waste (e.g., food containers, 
packaging, and construction scraps) over a relatively short period of time. Existing disposal services and 
landfills in the Project area include Imperial County Sanitation in Imperial; Palo Verde Valley Disposal 
Service in Blythe; and Suburban Sanitation Services and the South Yuma County Landfill in Yuma. 
These facilities would be able to accommodate the solid waste generated by the Project. Operation of the 
Project would not require any additional employees and would not result in the construction or expansion 
of any landfills. North Baja would comply with all Federal, State, and local statutes and regulations 
related to solid waste disposal. As a result, no significant impacts are anticipated. 

Schools 


Comments were received during the scoping process regarding the proximity of the proposed 
facilities to school property and potential impacts on school bus routes. The Palo Verde Unified School 
District, El Centro Elementary School District, and Holtville Unified School District serve students in the 
Project area. The closest school to the proposed Project is Meadows Elementary School, which is more 


4-174 


than 0.75 mile west of the terminus of the IID Lateral in El Centro. No potentially significant impacts on 
this school are anticipated from either construction or operation of the proposed Project. 

Potential impacts on school bus routes could occur during construction of the proposed Project. 
The Palo Verde Unified School District manages school bus routes in Blythe that travel along 18th 
Avenue. In addition, bus routes cross 18 th Avenue at the intersections of Intake Boulevard, South C & D 
Canal Boulevard, South Broadway, De Frain Boulevard, Arrowhead Boulevard, Neighbors Boulevard, 
and Keim Boulevard. During construction, bus traffic may be slightly disrupted in the same manner as 
other traffic; however, access by school buses would not be precluded. Potential impacts on traffic as a 
result of the proposed Project are discussed in detail in Section 4.10. 

Because most of the non-local workers are expected to come alone without their families during 
the construction period and because no additional permanent employees would be required during 
operation of the proposed facilities, the Project would not result in any increases in demand for school- 
related services. 

4.9.5 Property Values 

Comments were received during the scoping process regarding the impacts of the proposed 
Project on property values. North Baja currently maintains easements to operate its A-Line. Placement 
of the B-Line adjacent to the existing A-Line should not change or affect the value of a property. Because 
the B-Line would be entirely within North Baja’s existing easement, North Baja would not need to 
acquire new permanent easements or property to operate this facility. North Baja would, however, need 
to acquire temporary easements or property to construct the proposed facilities. North Baja would also 
need to acquire the applicable easements for the BEI and IID Laterals. The easement acquisition process 
is described in Section 4.8.2. 

The effect that a pipeline easement may have on property value is a damage-related issue that 
would be negotiated between the landowner and North Baja during the easement acquisition process. The 
easement acquisition process is designed to provide fair compensation to the landowner for the right to 
use the property for pipeline construction and operation. Appraisal methods used to value land are based 
on objective characteristics of the property and any improvements. The impact a pipeline may have on 
the value of a tract of land depends on many factors, including the size of the tract, the values of adjacent 
properties, the presence of other utilities, the current value of the land, and the current land use. 
Subjective valuation is generally not considered in appraisals. This is not to say that the pipeline would 
not affect resale values. A potential purchaser of property may make a decision to purchase land based on 
his or her planned use, such as agricultural, future subdivision, or second home on the property in 
question. If the presence of a pipeline renders the planned use unfeasible, it is possible that a potential 
purchaser would decide not to purchase the property. However, each potential purchaser has different 
criteria and differing capabilities to purchase land. 

The Interstate Natural Gas Association of America (INGAA) conducted a national case study to 
determine if the presence of a pipeline on a piece of property affected the property value or sale price of 
the property. The INGAA Foundation Natural Gas Pipeline Impact Study (2001) found that there was not 
a significant impact on the sale price of properties along natural gas pipelines. The study further 
concluded that neither the size of the pipeline (diameter) nor the product carried by a pipeline has any 
significant impact on sale price. 

Property taxes for a piece of property are generally based on the actual use of the land. 
Construction of the pipeline would not change the general use of the land, but would preclude 
construction of aboveground structures on the permanent right-of-way. If a landowner believes that the 


4-175 


presence of a pipeline easement reduces the value of his or her land, resulting in an overpayment of 
property taxes, he or she may appeal the issue of the assessment and subsequent property taxation to the 
local property tax agency. This is the proper forum for this issue to be addressed. 

Comments were received during the scoping process that installation of the pipeline adjacent to 
Parker Road in El Centro would have a negative impact on income from rental property. The effect that 
construction may have on income derived from rental property is a damage-related issue and should be 
negotiated between the parties during the easement acquisition process. This negotiation is outside of the 
scope of this EIS/EIR. 

4.9.6 Tax Revenues 

Construction and operation of the Project would have a beneficial impact on local tax revenue, 
based on the tax revenue projections contained in Tables 4.9.6-1 and 4.9.6-2. Revenue from sales tax 
would be greater during construction due to the temporary influx of workers to the area. The increase in 
property tax revenue, about $3.4 million annually, would be generated throughout the life of the Project. 


TABLE 4.9.6-1 

Estimated Property Tax Payments for Facilities Associated with the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 

Facility 

Location 

Estimated Annual Tax Payment 

Ehrenberg Compressor Station Modifications, El 

Paso Meter Station Modifications, and 

B-Line 

La Paz County, Arizona 

$145,000 

B-Line, BEI Lateral, and Blythe Meter Station 

Riverside County, California 

$786,000 

B-Line, Ogilby Meter Station Modifications, Odorant 
Facility, IID Lateral, and El Centro Meter Station 

Imperial County, California 

$2,512,000 

Project Total 


$3,443,000 


TABLE 4.9.6-2 

Estimated Sales Tax Revenue Generated by the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 


Project Total 

La Paz County, 
Arizona 

Riverside County, 
California 

Imperial County, 
California 

Payroll 

$50,000,000 

NA 

NA 

NA 

Percent of total income spent for taxable sales 

38.8 

NA 

NA 

NA 

Income spent for taxable sales 

$19,400,000 

NA 

NA 

NA 

Percent spent in each county 

-- 

5% 

55% 

40% 

Income spent for taxable sales by county 

- 

$970,000 

$10,670,000 

$7,760,000 

Tax rate - State jurisdiction 

-- 

5.6% 

6.25% 

6.25% 

Tax rate - county/city jurisdiction 

- 

1.0% 

1.5% 

1.5% 

Sales tax to State 

-- 

$54,320 

$666,875 

$485,000 

Sales tax to county/city 

— 

$9,700 

$160,050 

$116,400 

Source: California State Board of Equalization 2005. 




Arizona Department of Revenue 2006. 





NA = Not Available. 






As discussed in Section 4.9.2, North Baja estimates that the total Project payroll would amount to 
about $50,000,000. Of this total, North Baja anticipates that about 40 percent would be spent for taxable 
sales (see Table 4.9.6-2). Sales taxes in the counties affected by the Project in Arizona and California are 


4-176 









6.6 percent and 7.75 percent, respectively. The majority of this amount (5.6 percent in Arizona and 6.25 
percent in California) would go to the State. The remainder (1.0 percent in Arizona and 1.5 percent in 
California) would go to the county and local governments, resulting in annual sales tax revenues of 
$9,700 to La Paz County, $160,050 to Riverside County, and $116,400 to Imperial County. 

4.9.7 Arrowhead Alternative 

Construction of the Arrowhead Alternative would not change the total time required for 
construction of the proposed facilities and would not result in additional impacts on the existing 
population or local economy, public services, or housing. 

4.9.8 No Project Alternative 

Under the No Project Alternative, the FERC would deny North Baja’s application for a 
Certificate and a Presidential Permit amendment, the CSLC would deny North Baja’s application for an 
amendment to its right-of-way lease across California’s Sovereign and School Lands, and the BLM would 
deny North Baja’s application to amend its existing Right-of-Way Grant and obtain a Temporary Use 
Permit for the portion of the Project on Federal lands. The No Project Alternative means that the Project 
would not go forward and the Project-related facilities would not be installed. Accordingly, none of the 
potential environmental impacts identified for the construction and operation of the proposed Project 
would occur. 

Because the proposed Project is privately funded, it is unknown whether North Baja would fund 
another energy project in California. However, should the No Project Alternative be selected, the energy 
needs identified in Section 1.1 would likely be addressed through other means, such as through other 
LNG or natural gas-related pipeline projects. Such projects may result in potential environmental impacts 
of the nature and magnitude of the proposed Project as well as impacts particular to their respective 
configurations and operations; however, these impacts cannot be predicted with any certainty at this time. 


4-177 


4.10 TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC 


The local road and highway system in the vicinity of the Project facilities is well developed. The 
principal north/south roadways are SRs 78 and 111, and the principal west/east roadways are Interstates 8 
and 10. Most local public roads in the vicinity of the proposed Project are paved. There is also rail 
service in the Project area. Construction of the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project could affect 
transportation and traffic during construction across and within roadways and railroads and due to 
increased vehicle traffic associated with the commuting of the construction workforce to the Project area 
as well as the movement of construction vehicles and delivery of equipment and materials to the 
construction work area. 

4.10.1 Significance Criteria 

An adverse impact on transportation and traffic would be considered significant and would 
require mitigation if Project construction or operation would: 

• result in a short- or long-term decrease in the level of service of a roadway; 

• cause the closure of an arterial or collector roadway for more than 48 hours 
consecutively; 

• prevent movement of emergency vehicles; 

• conflict with planned transportation projects or adopted public transportation policies; 

• create noticeable deterioration of local roadway surfaces; or 

• create a safety hazard for vehicles, pedestrians, or rail operations. 

4.10.2 Construction Across and Within Roadways and Railroads 

Construction across roads and highways would result in short-term impacts on public 
transportation while construction activities pass through the Project area. Table 4.10.2-1 lists the named 
roads and highways that would be crossed by the proposed Project, as well as North Baja’s proposed 
construction method. 

North Baja would apply for the permits necessary for road crossings and would comply with all 
permit stipulations. The railroad crossings would be bored. Boring typically requires temporary extra 
workspace on both sides of the crossing for excavating bore pits to the depth of the pipeline. The bore 
pits are typically just outside of the road or railroad right-of-way limits; however, site-specific conditions, 
such as the presence of structures or waterbodies, may require the bore pits and temporary extra 
workspace to be moved within the road right-of-way. In some cases, 24-hour operations are required 
during difficult boring operations where ground conditions and ambient daytime temperatures contribute 
to overheating of the equipment and operators. Roadways and railroads crossed using the bore 
construction method typically remain open so that construction would not prevent the movement of 
emergency vehicles. Overall, there would be little or no disruption to traffic at road or railroad crossings 
that are bored. Bored crossings would also minimize the potential for safety hazards for vehicles and rail 
operations. No work would occur within the road or railroad rights-of-way unless expressly permitted by 
the applicable agency. As a result, impacts on roads and railroads that would be crossed using the bore 
construction method would be less than significant. 


4-178 


TABLE 4.10.2-1 


Named Roads Crossed by the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 

Facility/Location Milepost Road Name Proposed Crossing Method 


B-Line 

La Paz County, Arizona 

Riverside County, California 0.4 

3.4 
4.0 

4.4 
4.9 

5.4 

5.4 

6.5 

7.4 

8.5 

9.5 

10.5 

11.5 

Imperial County, California 25.6 

28.2 

31.4 

33.1 
35.0 
49.0 
55.0 

66.4 
70.9 
71.0 

71.4 

74.5 

75.0 

75.1 

BEI Lateral 

Riverside County, California 
IID Lateral 

Imperial County, California 2.4 

3.5 

4.4 

5.6 

5.7 

8.5 

13.1 

13.6 
26.0 
27.3 

28.5 

29.5 

30.5 

31.5 
32.0 


- None Crossed - 

Riviera Drive 

HDD 

Intake Boulevard 

Open cut 

Jones Road 

Open cut 

C & D Boulevard 

Bore 

South Broadway Road 

Open cut 

Lovekin Boulevard 

Bore 

Arizona - California Railroad 

Bore 

DeFrain Boulevard 

Open cut 

Arrowhead Boulevard 

Open cut 

State Route 78 

Bore 

Stephenson Boulevard 

Open cut 

Keim Road 

Bore 

Rannells Road 

Open cut 

Old Palo Verde Road 

Open cut 

State Route 78 

Bore 

Old Mitchell’s Camp Road 

Open cut 

Three Slashes Road 

Open cut 

Walters Camp Road 

Open cut 

Black Mountain Road 

Open cut 

Ogilby Road 

Bore 

(County Highway S34) 

Gold Rock Ranch Road 

Open cut 

Ted Kipf Road 

Open cut 

American Girl Mine Road 

Open cut 

Union Pacific Railroad 

Bore 

Ogilby Road 

Bore 

(County Highway S34) 

Center of the World Drive 

Bore 

Interstate 8 

Bore 

- None Crossed - 

Interstate 8 

HDD 

Grays Well Road 

Open cut 

Grays Well Road 

Open cut 

Grays Well Road 

Open cut 

Interstate 8 

Bore 

Gordons Well Road 

Open cut 

Brock Research Road 

Bore 

Evan Hewes Highway 

Open cut 

Evan Hewes Highway 

Open cut 

Interstate 8 

Bore 

Vanderlinden Road 

Open cut 

Miller Road 

Bore 

(County Highway S33) 

Enz Road 

Open cut 

Bonds Corner Road 

Bore 

Schali Road 

Open cut 


4-179 




TABLE 4.10.2-1 (cont’d) 


Named Roads Crossed by the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 


Facility/Location 

Milepost 

Road Name 

Proposed Crossing Method 


33.2 

Towland Road 

Open cut 


34.2 

State Route 7 
(Holtviile Orchard Road) 

Bore 


34.9 

Mets Road 

Open cut 


35.9 

Anderholt Road 

Open cut 


36.9 

Barbara Worth Road 

Open cut 


37.9 

Meloland Road 

Open cut 


27.4 

Holdridge Road 

Open cut 


39.1 

Interstate 8 

Bore 


40.4 

Bowker Road/East Ross 
Road 

Bore 


41.7 

East Hamilton Road 

Open cut 


42.2 

East Gillette Road 

Open cut 


42.9 

East Evan Hughes Road 

Bore 


43.4 

State Route 111 

Bore 


44.7 

Cooley Road 

Open cut 


45.6 

North Dogwood Road 
(County Highway S31) 

Bore 


4-180 




Most smaller, unpaved roads and driveways would be open cut where permitted by local 
authorities or landowners. North Baja would implement several mitigation measures at open-cut 
crossings to ensure safety and to minimize traffic disruptions. For example, no roads would be closed 
unless adequate detours are provided. If a detour is required, traffic would be rerouted to another nearby 
road. This would not result in a significant change in the level of service of Project-area roadways (see 
Section 4.10.3). If no reasonable detour is feasible, North Baja would leave at least one lane of traffic 
open. Where Project construction crosses roads necessary for access to private residences and no 
alternative entrance exists, North Baja would implement measures (e.g., plating over the open portion of 
the trench) to maintain passage for landowners and emergency vehicles. Most open-cut crossings would 
be completed and the road resurfaced in 1 or 2 days; therefore, construction would not cause the closure 
of a roadway for more than 48 hours consecutively. 

During the scoping process, comments were received regarding the potential for future settling of 
roads that would be crossed using the open-cut method. To address these concerns and to further 
minimize the potential for noticeable deterioration of local roadway surfaces, North Baja would prepare 
construction specifications that are designed to avoid settling of the finished grade and would also require 
the contractor to repair any settling, should it occur. If road settlement attributed to pipeline construction 
occurs after the pipeline is in operation, North Baja would make the necessary repairs as required by the 
jurisdictional agency. Implementation of North Baja’s proposed mitigation measures for open-cut road 
crossings would reduce impacts associated with the Project to less than significant levels. 

During the scoping process, the USCIS expressed concern about the ability to maintain access 
across roads used by the Border Patrol. North Baja consulted with the Border Patrol about any concerns 
it may have and the Border Patrol stated that it has not identified any concerns about the Project (Whipple 
2006). 


In addition to the roads crossed, several miles of both the B-Line and IID Lateral would be within 
or adjacent to roadways (see Table 2.2.1-1). Major roadways potentially affected by construction and 
operation of these facilities include 18th Avenue, SR 78, Ogilby Road, Interstate 8, and several Imperial 
County roadways (e.g., Evan Hewes Highway, Hunt Road, and East Ross Road). The BEI Lateral would 
also be in Riviera Drive for a portion of the route. A discussion of each of these roadways is provided 
below. 

18 th Avenue 

Construction of the B-Line would take place within the road or road shoulder of 18 th Avenue for 
about 7.6 miles between MPs 2.9 and 10.5. The B-Line would also be adjacent to the roadway for 
another 0.6 mile between MPs 2.3 and 2.9. Although 18 th Avenue is not a heavily traveled roadway, 24 
residences and 2 businesses are along the proposed route. To minimize road closures or periods of 
restricted access, North Baja plans to designate a specialized crew for construction within 18 th Avenue. 
This crew would have experience with working in congested areas and would have two major 
components. The first crew would install the pipeline through the major crossings, and the second crew 
would be responsible for the installation of pipeline sections between crossings. Construction would 
advance at an estimated 500 feet per day; however, to expedite completion and thereby minimize the 
duration of inconvenience to residents, construction may occur at numerous locations along 18 th Avenue 
simultaneously. Direct construction impacts at any given location are expected to last about 2 to 3 weeks 
(excluding repaving). 

North Baja has developed a Traffic Management Plan for 18 th Avenue in consultation with the 
County of Riverside Transportation Department (see Appendix H). The plan identifies traffic control 
measures; traffic signage requirements; construction measures to comply with the CalTrans Traffic 


4-181 


Manual; construction hours; vehicular, pedestrian, and emergency vehicle access provisions; nightly shut¬ 
down procedures; clearance distance between excavations and vehicular traffic; placement of safety 
fencing; and construction equipment storage. The plan identifies the following mitigation measures to 
minimize traffic-related impacts associated with construction within 18 th Avenue: 

• the pipeline would be installed with a minimum of 36 inches of cover and 12 inches of 
separation from other utilities or obstructions. A minimum of 2 feet would be maintained 
under canals and 5 feet over drains; 

• intersections would be bored or trenched (trenched intersections would be steel plated if 
construction does not occur on consecutive days); 

• North Baja would contact each owner and/or tenant of the properties abutting the road to 
explain the construction process and identify any special conditions or concerns that need 
to be incorporated into the construction plans. In addition, these adjacent residents and 
businesses would be notified by hand-delivered flyers 2 weeks before construction. The 
flyers would include the dates of construction, work hours, traffic detours, and contact 
numbers for North Baja and the contractor. Emergency response agencies would also be 
notified of the work schedule; 

• the Underground Service Alert would be notified at least 48 hours before beginning 
work; 

• flag persons would be provided to route traffic around construction equipment and 
obstructions; 

• work would be scheduled during daylight hours unless alternative schedules are 
authorized; 

• access would be maintained to all residences or businesses except during actual trenching 
operations. Steel plates would be available to maintain access to driveways during 
periods when the trench is open; 

• non-local traffic would be detoured around construction activities; 

• one lane of restricted traffic movement would be maintained through the construction 
area. This would allow residences, businesses, and emergency vehicles reasonable access 
during the construction activities; 

• during non-work times, the work area would be secured and patrolled to minimize safety 
hazards associated with open trenches, heavy equipment, and other construction 
operations; and 

• open trenches would be covered or cordoned off during non-working hours. 

The non-local traffic that would be detoured around construction activities would be directed to a 
road parallel and typically only 1 block north or south of 18 th Avenue. This would not result in a 
significant change in the level of service of Project-area roadways (see Section 4.10.3). Implementation 
of North Baja’s Traffic Management Plan for 18 th Avenue would reduce impacts associated with 
construction of the Project to less than significant levels. 


4-182 


State Route 78 


SR 78 is a two-lane State-maintained facility with wide shoulders. The B-Line would cross SR 
78 in two locations (MPs 8.5 and 28.2). North Baja would bore these two crossings. The B-Line would 
also be adjacent to SR 78 between MPs 30.9 and 31.3 and MPs 37.0 and 47.4 but it would not be within 
the road right-of-way except at the two road crossings. Because these two crossings would be bored, no 
significant impacts on this roadway have been identified. 

Ogilby Road 

Ogilby Road is a two-lane county roadway that connects SR 78 with Interstate 8. Ogilby Road 
would be crossed twice during construction of the B-Line (MPs 55.0 and 74.5). North Baja would bore 
these two crossings. In addition, the B-Line would be adjacent to Ogilby Road between MPs 55.0 and 
61.0 and between MPs 66.8 and 74.5 but it would not be within the road right-of-way except at the two 
road crossings. Because these two crossings would be bored, no significant impacts on this roadway have 
been identified. 

Interstate 8 

Interstate 8 is a major east-west freeway crossing southern Arizona and California. Interstate 8 
would be crossed by the B-Line at MP 75.1 and by the IID Lateral in four locations (MPs 2.4, 5.7, 27.3, 
and 39.1). North Baja would either HDD or bore each of these crossings. The HDD method is described 
in Section 2.3.2. Similar to the bore construction method, the HDD method would result in little or no 
disruption to traffic. As a result, no significant impacts on this roadway have been identified. 

Imperial County Roadways 

Construction of the IID Lateral would occur within several Imperial County roadways (e.g., Evan 
Hewes Highway, Hunt Road, and East Ross Road). To avoid or minimize impacts along these roadways, 
North Baja developed a Traffic Mitigation Plan for Imperial County Roads (see Appendix H). The plan 
identifies the same mitigation measures as discussed above for 18 th Avenue. In addition, North Baja 
would install the pipeline in sections and would have a specialized crew designated for construction to 
minimize road closures or periods of restricted access along Imperial County roadways. In contrast to 
construction procedures for 18 th Avenue, North Baja would close off 0.5- to 1.0-mile-long sections of 
road and reroute traffic around the area through the use of signs and detours (while maintaining access for 
residents and emergency vehicles). The detours would direct traffic to another nearby roadway and 
would not result in a significant change in the level of service of the roadway. No more than 2 miles of 
work area would be active at any one time, and construction would advance along the roadway at an 
estimated 0.5 mile per day. Excluding any repaving that may be required, direct construction impacts at 
any given location would last no more than 2 to 3 weeks. Implementation of these measures and North 
Baja’s Traffic Management Plan for Imperial County Roads would reduce impacts associated with 
construction of the Project to less than significant levels. 

Riviera Drive 

As part of a proposed residential development, the City of Blythe is considering a realignment of 
Riviera Drive (see Section 4.8.3.2). The BEI Lateral would be constructed within the existing Riviera 
Drive between MPs 0.3 and 0.6. North Baja has had preliminary discussions with the developer of the 
proposed development to determine how to make the proposed Project and the residential project 
compatible. North Baja would continue to work with the developer as both projects move forward to 
ensure that both projects are consistent with one another. Before construction. North Baja would obtain a 


4-183 


franchise agreement and an encroachment permit from the County of Riverside Transportation 
Department for construction within Riviera Drive. Implementation of these measures would reduce 
potential impacts on this planned realignment to less than significant levels. 

4.10.3 Increased Vehicle Traffic 

Construction of the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project would result in temporary increases to 
traffic levels due to the commuting of the construction workforce to the Project area as well as the 
movement of construction vehicles and delivery of equipment and materials to the construction work 
area. Table 4.10.3-1 identifies the average daily traffic counts and the existing level of service of the 
major roadways potentially affected by the Project. As indicated in Table 4.10.3-1, the roadways in the 
Project area have a level of service of A or B. 


TABLE 4.10.3-1 


Major Roadways Potentially Affected by the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 

Facility/County/Road 

Mileposts 

Average Daily Traffic Count 

Existing Level of Service a 

B-Line 

Riverside 

18 lh Avenue 

2.3- 10.5 

636 

A 

State Route 78 

8.5 

1,700 

B 

Imperial 

State Route 78 

28.2 

30.9-31.3 

37.0 - 47.4 

1.700 

2.700 

B 

Ogilby Road 

55.0 - 61.0 

540 

— 


66.8 - 74.5 

700 

A 

Interstate 8 

75.1 

12,000 

A 

BEI Lateral 

Riverside 

Riviera Drive 

0.3 - 0.6 

-- 

- 

IID Lateral 

Imperial 

Interstate 8 

2.4, 5.7, 27.3, 39.1 

12,000 

A 

Evan Hewes Highway 

8.0-27.1 

1,000 b 

- 

Hunt Road 

27.6 - 38.7 

- 

— 

East Ross Road 

39.6-41.3 

5,630 

— 


Level of service is defined as a qualitative measure describing operational conditions in terms of such factors as speed, 
travel time, freedom to maneuver, comfort, convenience, and safety. A level of service of A indicates that a roadway 
has little or no delay or congestion. A level of service of B indicates that a roadway has slight congestion or delay. 

b Through the City of El Centro, Evan Hewes Highway serves as Adams Avenue (a four-lane facility) and is estimated to 

carry approximately 9,000 vehicles per day; however, most other segments of the highway, including those affected by 
the proposed Project, provide only one travel lane per direction and are estimated to carry approximately 1,000 vehicles 
per day. 

Average daily traffic counts and/or level of service have not been established for these roadways. 

Source: California Department of Transportation 2002. 


Table 4.10.3-2 lists the types of construction vehicles and estimated number of trips associated 
with the Project. North Baja estimates that during peak construction up to 400 people would be working 
along the B-Line. Based on an industry standard of 1.3 people per car, the resulting number of roundtrips 
per day is expected to be about 308. Because pipeline construction work is generally scheduled to take 
advantage of all daylight hours, workers would commute to and from the contractor yards and 


4-184 






construction right-of-way during off-peak traffic hours (e.g., before 7:00 AM and after 6:00 PM). 
Construction workers would typically meet at the contractor yards and share rides to the construction 
right-of-way, thereby reducing overall traffic. In addition, work would be spread along the length of the 
construction spread, which would reduce the impact on traffic at any one location. 



TABLE 4.10.3-2 

Anticipated Construction Traffic Associated with the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 



Duration 

Daily Workforce 

Truck Roundtrips 

Contractor Yard 

Facility 

(months) 

Vehicle Roundtrips 

Pipe Stringing 

Daily Other Trucks 

Pipe 

Materials 

BEI Lateral, 

Blythe Meter 

Station, 

Aboveground 

Facility 

Modifications 

2 

38 

3 trips daily, 
over 3 weeks 

30 

Ripley 

Yard 

18 th Avenue 
Yard 

B-Line 

4 to 6 

308 

40 trips daily, 
over 12 to 16 weeks 

100 

Ripley 

Yard 

18 th Avenue 
Yard 

IID Lateral 

2 to 4 

115 

5 trips daily, 
over 10 to 20 weeks 

70 

Ripley 

Yard 

IID Lateral 
Yard 


In addition to the construction workforce, the delivery of construction equipment and materials to 
the construction work area could temporarily congest existing transportation networks at specific 
locations. The construction equipment would be initially staged at a pipe storage and contractor yard and 
then transported to the construction right-of-way using surfaced streets and approved access roads (see 
Table 4.10.3-2). Once a vehicle leaves the pipe storage or contractor yard, its exact route would vary 
depending on the current location of construction activity. Equipment would be dropped off in one 
location and would then move in a linear direction along the right-of-way. As a result, most equipment 
would be on the pipeline right-of-way and would not affect traffic on local roads after its initial delivery 
to the construction site. Truck traffic associated with pipe hauling during construction of the B-Line 
would have the greatest potential to impact traffic levels. During B-Line construction, pipe in lengths of 
60 to 80 feet would be hauled from the yards by trailer trucks during the daylight hours for an 
approximately 12- to 16-week period. It is estimated that during this period 40 truck loads of pipe would 
travel between the Ripley Contractor Yard and the pipeline route each day. North Baja states that the 
movement of materials and equipment to the construction work area would add as many as 100 truck trips 
per day and that most of these deliveries would occur during early morning and evening hours. 

Overall, the number and frequency of construction vehicle trips would be low on any particular 
roadway at any one time because construction would move sequentially along the Project right-of-way. A 
discussion of impacts on transportation during construction across and within roadways is presented in 
Section 4.10.2. Trips by vehicles that would visit the right-of-way on a regular basis (e.g., pickup trucks, 
crew vehicles) would be distributed along the length of the route as the pipe is installed and construction 
activity progresses to a different part of the right-of-way. Truck traffic associated with transporting pipe 
and other materials to the construction work area could result in temporary detours or obstructions in 
traffic flow due to vehicle size or may require short-term assistance from local police in limited instances. 
However, the Project would not cause an increase in traffic that would be substantial in relation to the 
existing traffic load and capacity. As a result, because most roadways in the Project area currently 
operate at a level of service of A or B, the relatively minor increase in traffic associated with the Project 
would not result in a significant change in the level of service on any roadway. Therefore, impacts 
associated with increased traffic levels during construction of the Project would be less than significant. 


4-185 






North Baja and its contractors would comply with local road weight limits and restrictions and 
would keep roads free of mud and other debris that may be deposited by construction equipment; 
therefore, the Project would not create a safety hazard for vehicles or pedestrians. Track-driven 
equipment would cross roads on tires or equipment pads to minimize road damage. Because North Baja 
would repair any roadways damaged by construction activities, the Project would not result in noticeable 
deterioration of local roadway surfaces. 

No significant impacts would be expected during operation of the Project because there would be 
only minimal traffic associated with operation and maintenance of the pipelines. Because no new 
permanent employees would be required to operate the facilities, traffic levels during operation would be 
the same as currently experienced for operation of North Baja’s A-Line. 

4.10.4 Arrowhead Alternative 

If the Arrowhead Alternative were adopted, the potential impacts on transportation and traffic 
along Riviera Drive would not occur. 

Between 18 th and Seeley Avenues (MPs 0.0 and 1.0), the Arrowhead Alternative would be within 
the right-of-way of Arrowhead Boulevard. North Baja would use the same construction methods between 
MPs 0.0 and 1.0 of the Arrowhead Alternative as those described for portions of the proposed B-Line 
within 18 th Avenue (see Section 4.10.2). North Baja would implement the measures identified in its 
Traffic Management Plan for 18 th Avenue (see Appendix H) to also minimize traffic-related impacts 
along Arrowhead Boulevard. 

4.10.5 No Project Alternative 

Under the No Project Alternative, the FERC would deny North Baja’s application for a 
Certificate and a Presidential Permit amendment, the CSLC would deny North Baja’s application for an 
amendment to its right-of-way lease across California’s Sovereign and School Lands, and the BLM would 
deny North Baja’s application to amend its existing Right-of-Way Grant and obtain a Temporary Use 
Permit for the portion of the Project on Federal lands. The No Project Alternative means that the Project 
would not go forward and the Project-related facilities would not be installed. Accordingly, none of the 
potential environmental impacts identified for the construction and operation of the proposed Project 
would occur. 

Because the proposed Project is privately funded, it is unknown whether North Baja would fund 
another energy project in California. However, should the No Project Alternative be selected, the energy 
needs identified in Section 1.1 would likely be addressed through other means, such as through other 
LNG or natural gas-related pipeline projects. Such projects may result in potential environmental impacts 
of the nature and magnitude of the proposed Project as well as impacts particular to their respective 
configurations and operations; however, these impacts cannot be predicted with any certainty at this time. 


4-186 


4.11 CULTURAL RESOURCES 

4.11.1 Significance Criteria 

An adverse impact on cultural resources would be considered significant and would require 
mitigation if Project construction or operation would result in an unresolvable adverse effect on the 
characteristics that contribute to the eligibility of a historic or prehistoric property for listing on the NRHP 
or the CRHR. Adverse effects may include, but are not limited to, the following: 

• physical destruction of or damage to all or part of the property; 

• change in the character of the property’s use or of physical features within a property’s 
setting that contribute to its historic significance (e.g., by isolating the property from its 
setting); and 

• introduction of visual, atmospheric, or audible elements that diminish the integrity of the 
property’s significant historic features. 

4.11.2 Regulatory Requirements 


Federal 


The FERC is responsible for complying with section 106 of the NHPA, which requires Federal 
agencies to take into account the effects of their undertakings on historic properties and afford the 
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) an opportunity to comment. The procedures for 
complying with section 106 are outlined in the ACHP’s regulations (Title 36 CFR Part 800). The effects 
of the Project on properties of traditional religious and cultural importance to Native Americans must also 
be considered in accordance with section 101 (d)(6) of the NHPA and the American Indian Religious 
Freedom Act. North Baja, as a non-Federal party, is assisting the FERC in meeting its obligations under 
section 106 and the implementing regulations in Title 36 CFR Part 800. In addition, the BLM must 
consider Native American religious and cultural concerns for the portion of the Project crossing Federal 
lands in accordance with the Archaeological Resource Protection Act, the Native American Graves 
Protection and Repatriation Act, and Sacred Sites Executive Order 13007. 

As the lead Federal agency, the FERC is responsible for determining NRHP eligibility and 
Project effects in consultation with the Arizona and California State Historic Preservation Offices 
(SHPOs); the BLM; the BOR; and the FWS, Cibola NWR. If, after completing review, the agencies and 
the SHPOs agree that cultural resources found during surveys are ineligible for the NRHP, no further 
consideration of these resources would be required. 

In evaluating cultural resources, several criteria are considered. First, significant cultural 
resources (as defined for Federal undertakings) include those prehistoric and historic sites, districts, 
buildings, structures, and objects, as well as properties with traditional religious or cultural importance to 
Native Americans or other groups, that are listed, or are eligible for listing, on the NRHP (historic 
properties) according to the criteria outlined in Title 36 CFR Part 60.4. Second, cultural resources that do 
not meet the NRHP criteria but may qualify as a unique characteristic of an area are considered under 
NEPA. 

CEQA 


The CSLC is responsible for complying with all provisions of the CEQA covering cultural 
resources, including the CEQA sections 21083.2 and 21084.1, and section 15064.5 of the Guidelines for 
Implementing the CEQA. Cultural resources include prehistoric and historic-period archaeological sites, 


4-187 


districts, and objects; standing historic structures, buildings, districts, and objects; and locations of 
important historic events or sites of traditional/cultural importance. The State CEQA Guidelines section 
15064.5 indicates a project may have a significant environmental effect if it causes “substantial adverse 
change” in the significance of an historic resource as defined in section 15064.5(a)(1) through (a)(4). 
Under the CEQA, the CSLC is also required to take into account the effect on properties eligible for 
listing on the CRHR or that meet the definition of a unique archaeological resource in the CEQA section 
21083.2. 

Under the CEQA, archaeological resources are sometimes treated differently than “historical 
resources.” Thus, it is important to first determine whether certain archaeological sites are “historical 
resources” for purposes of the CEQA. An archaeological resource is considered an historic resource if it 
is listed, or determined eligible for listing, on the CRHR, included in a local register of historical 
resources, or identified as significant in an historical resource survey. For archaeological resources that 
are not “historical resources,” it must then be determined if they are “unique” archaeological resources 
according to Public Resources Code 21083.2 (g). The distinction may be important because mitigation 
measures sometimes differ for archaeological and historical resources. 

4.11.3 Cultural Resources Assessment 

North Baja contacted the Arizona and California SHPOs regarding the proposed Project and the 
applicability of previous surveys conducted for the A-Line. On March 20, 2006, the Arizona SHPO 
concurred that the current area of potential effect and previous survey efforts conducted for the A-Line 
are adequate for the proposed Project. The California SHPO indicated that the guidelines regarding 
methods for identifying potential subsurface sites have changed since the A-Line was constructed. The 
SHPO suggested North Baja use the data from the A-Line data recovery and construction monitoring to 
address the potential for buried sites, or alternatively to develop new field methods regarding such sites. 
North Baja has indicated it would address these comments in its Evaluation Plan. 

As part of its application, North Baja provided the FERC with its Overview and Survey Report, 
and its Unanticipated Discovery Plan (see Section 4.11.4). The report provided the results of the previous 
A-Line survey and the results of the current surveys of the IID Lateral, BEI Lateral, Blythe Meter Station, 
SoCal Gas Interconnect, and the remaining ancillary areas associated with the proposed Project. The 
report was also provided to the CSLC; the BLM; the BOR; the FWS, Cibola NWR; and the California 
SHPO. To date, comments have been received from the BLM, the BOR, and the California SHPO. 

North Baja subsequently provided the FERC with Addendum Reports 2 and 3. Addendum 
Report 2 documents the results of surveys of the Arrowhead Alternative (see Sections 3.2.5 and 4.11.7). 
Addendum Report 3 documents the results of a records search for the Corridor L Alternative (see Section 
3.2.3.2). North Baja provided Addendum Report 2 to the California SHPO but did not provide the report 
to the BLM or the BOR because the report is not applicable to Federal lands. North Baja indicated that it 
does not plan to provide Addendum Report 3 to the California SHPO because the report presents the 
results of a records search for an alternative to the proposed Project. North Baja has not provided 
Addendum Reports 2 or 3 to the CSLC and has not provided Addendum Report 3 to the BLM or the 
BOR. 


North Baja provided its Evaluation Plan to the FERC; the BLM; the BOR; the FWS, Cibola 
NWR; and the California SHPO. No comments have been received on the Evaluation Plan to date. 

B-Line 


North Baja surveyed a 220-foot-wide corridor in 2000 and 2001 for the construction of the A- 
Line, which also covers the construction work area for the proposed B-Line. No cultural resources were 


4-188 


identified in Arizona. Ninety cultural resources were identified along the B-Line route in California. Of 
these, 25 are historic-period sites (including 1 railroad, 3 transmission lines, 15 canals and other irrigation 
features [including the All-American Canal], debris scatters, and the townsite of Ogilby), 53 are 
prehistoric sites (including lithic and ceramic scatters, trails, rock features, milling, rock art, geoglyphs, 
and cleared circles), and 12 sites include both prehistoric and historic-period components. Four cultural 
resources are recommended as not eligible for listing on the NRHP and the CRHR and no further work is 
recommended. Forty-four cultural resources have not been evaluated to determine eligibility and 42 sites 
are recommended as eligible for listing on the NRHP and the CRHR. Of these, two NRHP-eligible 
cultural resources (Site CA-IMP-7911/H and the All-American Canal) were specifically identified by the 
BOR as important cultural resources. North Baja currently plans to mitigate impacts on Site CA-IMP- 
7911/H by avoiding and monitoring it during construction; however, in the event the site cannot be 
avoided, North Baja recommends data recovery be completed at the site. North Baja would avoid impacts 
on the All-American Canal by use of the HDD crossing method. In addition, the BOR identified several 
cultural resources that individually may not be eligible for the NRHP, but collectively contribute to an 
archaeological district being proposed by the BOR as part of a separate project that partially overlaps the 
proposed Project. Impacts on the other canals and irrigation features would be mitigated by North Baja’s 
proposal to monitor construction activities. North Baja would mitigate impacts on the remaining 
unevaluated and eligible sites by the use of avoidance measures (including installation of exclusion 
fencing), construction monitors, data recovery, and/or narrowing of the construction right-of-way. In 
addition, North Baja would conduct additional surveys or evaluations at four cultural resources that are 
unevaluated or eligible for listing on the NRHP and the CRHR. North Baja’s proposed evaluation 
methods for these sites are included in its Evaluation Plan. 

IID Lateral 

North Baja surveyed a 100- to 200-foot-wide corridor along about 43.0 miles of the proposed IID 
Lateral route. The remainder of the proposed route was not surveyed due to denied access. Between MPs 
0.0 and 8.4, North Baja surveyed a 200-foot-wide corridor centered on the proposed centerline. From MP 
8.4 to the end of the route. North Baja surveyed a 100-foot-wide corridor adjacent to the pavement of 
Evan Hewes Highway. North Baja has indicated it would complete surveys along the remaining portion 
of the IID Lateral route when landowner permission is obtained. 

North Baja’s surveys identified 98 cultural resources, 8 of which were previously recorded. 
These included 73 canals/drains (including the All-American Canal), 14 transmission/telephone lines or 
poles, 2 historic-period sites, 4 prehistoric sites (including ceramic and lithic scatters), 2 roads, 1 railroad, 
and 2 isolated finds. Five cultural resources are recommended as not eligible for listing on the NRHP and 
the CRHR and no further work is recommended. Two cultural resources (the All-American Canal and 
Site CA-IMP-8314) are recommended as eligible for listing on the NRHP and the CRHR. North Baja 
would avoid impacts on the All-American Canal by use of the HDD crossing method. North Baja would 
mitigate impacts on Site CA-IMP-8314 by avoiding the site during construction or implementing data 
recovery. The remaining 91 cultural resources have not been evaluated to determine eligibility for listing 
on the NRHP and the CRHR. Two of these sites would not be within the construction work area. 
Seventy-two of the unevaluated cultural resources are canals or other irrigation features, 13 are 
transmission/telephone lines or poles, and 1 is a railroad. North Baja would mitigate impacts on these 
features by monitoring them during construction to ensure avoidance. North Baja would conduct 
additional evaluations at the three remaining unevaluated sites. North Baja’s proposed evaluation 
methods for these sites are included in its Evaluation Plan. 

During the scoping process, the BOR identified the Coachella Canal as an important cultural 
resource. The IID Lateral route does not cross the Coachella Canal. In addition, a comment was received 
regarding the Plank Road. This cultural resource was identified during surveys along an alternate 
alignment of the IID Lateral between approximate MPs 3.5 and 8.5 and would not be affected by the 


4-189 


proposed Project. In the event this alternate route is chosen for the proposed Project, North Baja has 
recommended that the Plank Road be avoided and monitored during construction to ensure avoidance. 

BEI Lateral, Blythe Meter Station, SoCal Gas Interconnect 

North Baja surveyed a 110-foot-wide corridor along the BEI Lateral where it would be adjacent 
to Riviera Drive. The remaining portion of the BEI Lateral was covered by the survey of the Blythe 
Meter Station site, which included the SoCal Gas Interconnect. No cultural resources were identified 
along the BEI Lateral or at the Blythe Meter Station site. 

Ancillary Facilities 

North Baja completed surveys of the 18 th Avenue, Ripley, Ogilby, and IID Lateral (El Centro) 
Contractor Yards. No cultural resources were identified at these yards. 

North Baja has indicated it would complete surveys along any access roads that require 
improvements or modifications. 

4.11.4 Unanticipated Discovery Plan 

North Baja provided its Unanticipated Discovery Plan to be used in the event that cultural 
resources or human remains are discovered during construction. The plan includes contact procedures for 
the FERC; the SHPOs; the BLM; the BOR; the FWS, Cibola NWR; and Native American tribes, as 
appropriate. The plan provides for the protection in place of any unanticipated discoveries until 
appropriate evaluation and consultation have occurred. In the event that the discovery is determined to be 
of NRHP significance, a treatment plan (such as avoidance, monitoring, and/or scientific data recovery) 
would be developed and implemented in consultation with the appropriate parties. 

4.11.5 Native American Consultation 

North Baja contacted 18 Native American tribes whose traditional territories are crossed by the 
Project or who had been identified by the SHPOs or another knowledgeable party as having a potential 
cultural resources concern (see Table 4.11.5-1). North Baja sent initial consultation letters to the tribes on 
November 16, 2005. These letters described the Project and provided the tribes with the opportunity to 
comment on the Project and identify sites or places that might be of religious or cultural significance to 
the tribe. In early December 2005, North Baja conducted follow-up contacts with the Native American 
tribes by telephone. In addition, the tribes were contacted regarding participation in the cultural resources 
survey of the proposed pipeline route. Members of the Quechan Tribe and the Campo Band of Mission 
Indians participated in the cultural resources surveys as Native American monitors. 


4-190 


TABLE 4.11.5-1 


North Baja’s Native American Consultations Conducted for the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 

Tribe/Contact Name Date Description of Consultation 

Ak-Chin Indian Community 

Terry O. Enos, Chairman a 12/7/05 


Cabazon Band of Mission Indians 

John James, Chairperson a 12/7/05 

Steve Thomas a 12/7/05 

Cocopah Tribe 

Sherry Cordova, Chairwoman a Multiple 

Paul Soto, Planning Department 12/13/05 

Lisa Wanstall, Museum Director 1/19/06 

Colorado River Indian Tribes 

Betty Cornelius a 12/7/05 

Daniel Eddy, Jr., Chairman a Multiple 

Eric Shepard 12/8/05 

Multiple 

12/13/05 

Michael Tsosie Multiple 


3/2/06 

Fort McDowell Yavapai Nation 

Raphael Bear, President, 3 Vince Lujan, Multiple 

and Debbie, Planning Department 

Fort Mojave Indian Tribe 

Nora McDowell, Chairwoman 3 12/7/05 

Dorothy Hallock, Planning Department Multiple 

AhaMaKav Cultural Society 

Elda Butler, Director 3 12/8/05 

Linda Otero Multiple 

Fort Yuma-Quechan Tribe 

Mike Jackson, Sr., President 3 Multiple 

Pauline Jose 12/13/05 

Multiple 

1/19/06 


3/2/06 

Earl Hawes 3 12/8/05 

Gila River Indian Community 

Richard Narcia, Governor 3 Multiple 

Havasupai Tribe 

Linda Mahone, Chairwoman 3 Multiple 

RexToilusie, Environmental Multiple 


The proposed Project is outside the tribe's area; requested 
to receive future Project updates. 

No comments; requested to receive future Project updates. 
No comments; requested to receive future Project updates. 

Provided additional contact information (Paul Soto). 

Provided additional contact information (Cathi Alonzo, who 
identified Lisa Wanstall). 

Provided another copy of the November 16, 2005 letter and 
copies of previous reports and maps. 

Identified additional contact (Eric Shepard). 

Requested a copy of the letter be sent to Eric Shepard. 
Provided copy of November 16, 2005 letter. 

Identified additional contact (Michael Tsosie). 

Has not yet reviewed the initial consultation letter. 

Requested a copy of the initial consultation letter; 
requested copies of the background reports, data, and 
maps for review by the Cultural Committee. 

Provided Project information and survey reports. 

Multiple contacts and voicemails. 

Identified additional contact (Dorothy Hallock). 

Indicated she would bring the consultation letter to a 
December 20, 2005 meeting and expected the tribe to 
provide a “no interest-no comment” decision. 

Identified additional contact (Linda Otero). 

Had not yet reviewed the initial consultation letter; would 
like to have a planning meeting with several invited tribes to 
discuss overall Project activities. 

Identified additional contact (Pauline Jose). 

Provided copy of November 16, 2005 letter. 

Requested another copy of the initial consultation letter. 

Meeting with Project representatives. The tribe requested 
to have a monitor accompany the cultural resources survey 
of the IID Lateral, asked about future plans for the Project, 
and requested another meeting to clarify additional 
planning and engineering questions. 

Provided Project information and survey reports. 

No longer with the tribal government. 

The tribe will defer comments to the Colorado River Indian 
T ribe. 

Identified additional contact (Rex Toilusie). 

The tribe has no concerns about the proposed Project. 


4-191 




TABLE 4.11.5-1 (cont’d) 

North Baja’s Native American Consultations Conducted for the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 


Tribe/Contact Name Date 

Hopi Tribe 

Wayne Taylor, Jr., Chairman a 12/2/05 

Terry Morgart 12/2/05 


Hualapai Tribe 

Louise Benson, Chairwoman a Multiple 

Charles Vaughn, Chairman Multiple 


Loretta J ackson 12/9/05 

Los Coyotes Band of Mission Indians 

Katherine Saubel, Spokesperson a 12/8/05 

Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian 
Community 

Joni Ramos, President a Multiple 

Evelyn Andrews Multiple 

12/20/05 

Soboba Band of Mission Indians 

Robert J. Salgado, Sr., Chairman a 12/8/05 

Charlene Ryan, Cultural Multiple 

Tohono O’odham Nation 

Vivian Juan-Saunders, Chairwoman a Multiple 

Peter Steer, Manager of Cultural Affairs 1/6/06 

Torres-Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians 

Ray Torres, Sr., Chairperson a 12/8/05 

Joe Loya Multiple 

Twenty-Nine Palms Band of Mission Indians 

Dean Mike, Chairperson a 12/8/05 

12/22/05 


Description of Consultation 


Identified additional contact (Terry Morgart). 

The tribe will defer comments to the State Historic 
Preservation Office and other interested parties; has an 
interest in the White Tanks area; no known traditional 
cultural properties are in the Project area of potential effect. 

Identified new tribal chairman (Charles Vaughn). 

Identified concerns about existing trails from Baja across 
the tribe’s territory to a place called Wyckham, a prehistoric 
gathering spot; requested to receive future Project updates; 
identified additional contact (Loretta Jackson). 

The tribe will defer comments to the Colorado River Indian 
Tribe; requested to receive future Project updates. 

No comments on the Project, which is outside the tribe’s 
area; the tribe does not wish to receive further paperwork 
about this Project. 

The tribe will defer comments to the Tohono O'odham 
Nation; requested to receive future Project updates. 

Requested copy of the initial consultation letter. 

Provided copy of November 16, 2005 letter. 

Identified new tribal chairman (Charlene Ryan). 

Requested copy of the initial consultation letter; believes 
the tribe will not have any comments on the proposed 
Project. 

Multiple contacts and voicemails. 

The tribe will defer comments to the Colorado River Indian 
Tribe and the Mojave, the Cocopah, and the Quechan 
Tribes; requested a copy of the original survey report. 

Identified new tribal chairman (Joe Loya). 

Identified some concerns about the local trail systems near 
the proposed Project; requested to receive future Project 
updates. 

Requested another copy of the initial consultation letter. 

The tribe has no concerns about the proposed Project. 


Recipients were sent North Baja’s November 16, 2005 initial consultation letter. 


4-192 





At the time of North Baja’s follow-up consultations, the majority of the tribes indicated they had 
no concerns about the proposed Project or had not yet reviewed the Project materials. Some of these 
tribes also requested to receive future Project updates. North Baja was not able to complete follow up 
contacts with the Fort McDowell Yavapai Nation. The Gila River Indian Community and the Hualapai 
Tribe indicated they would defer comments to the Colorado River Indian Tribe. The Hualapai Tribe and 
the Torres-Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians identified concerns about existing trails in the Project area. 
As discussed in Section 4.11.3, North Baja would monitor construction activities to avoid impacts on 
trails. The Tohono O’odham Nation indicated it would defer comments to the Colorado River Indian 
Tribe and the Mojave, the Cocopah, and the Quechan Tribes. The Hopi Tribe stated it would defer 
comments to the SHPO and other interested parties, that it had an interest in the White Tanks area, and 
that no known traditional cultural properties were in the Project area. The Salt River Pima-Maricopa 
Indian Community indicated it would defer comments to the Tohono O’odham Nation. The proposed 
Project would not affect the White Tanks area, which is near Phoenix. No Native American religious 
concerns were identified. 

No traditional cultural properties have been identified in the proposed Project’s area of potential 
effect to date. North Baja has indicated it would continue consultations with Native American tribes 
throughout the Project. 

In addition to North Baja’s contacts, the Agency Staffs’ NOI/NOP dated August 30, 2005 was 
sent to 64 individuals from 33 Native American tribes that were identified by the California Native 
American Heritage Commission. One tribe, the Ramona Band of Cahuilla, provided comments in 
response to the NOI/NOP. The tribe expressed concern regarding Native American sites and Native 
American artifacts that may be discovered during excavation. The tribe also commented that a Native 
American monitor should be present during field studies and construction and requested copies of the 
report. Native American monitors were present during the survey, and North Baja has indicated that it 
would invite Native American representatives on field visits to cultural resources sites that would be 
affected by the proposed Project. In addition. North Baja would include Native American tribes in 
consultations regarding the recommended mitigation measures at potentially significant cultural resources 
that may be of concern to the tribes. No other responses have been received to date. 

4.11.6 General Impact and Mitigation 

Project impacts or effects include not only the physical disturbance of a historic property, but may 
also include the introduction, removal, or alteration of various visual or auditory elements, which could 
alter the traditional setting or ambience of the property. Once cultural resources surveys and evaluations 
are complete, the FERC, in consultation with the SHPOs; the BLM; the BOR; and the FWS, Cibola 
NWR, as applicable, would make determinations of eligibility and Project effects. Impacts on sites 
determined non-significant per NRHP eligibility criteria are not considered effects, and no further 
treatment or consideration is accorded these sites before construction and related Project activities. If a 
property listed on or eligible for listing on the NRHP would be affected, mitigation would be necessary. 
Mitigation may include, but not be limited to, one or more of the following measures: (1) avoidance 
through the use of realignment of the pipeline route, relocation of temporary extra workspaces, or changes 
in the construction and/or operational design; (2) data recovery, which may include the systematic 
professional excavation of an archaeological site or the preparation of photographs and/or measured 
drawings documenting standing structures; and (3) the use of landscaping or other techniques that would 
minimize or eliminate effects on the historic setting or ambience of standing structures. 

The Arizona SHPO indicated that the previous surveys were adequate for the currently proposed 
Project areas in Arizona. Any newly proposed areas not previously surveyed would be surveyed and 
reported in an addendum. Inventory in California is not complete. As discussed above, once cultural 


4-193 


resources surveys and evaluations are complete, the FERC, in consultation with the SHPO(s); the BLM; 
the BOR; and the FWS, Cibola NWR, as applicable, would make determinations of eligibility and Project 
effects. If historic properties would be adversely affected, the FERC, as the lead Federal agency, would 
notify the ACF1P to afford it an opportunity to participate in consultation. The CSLC would make the 
final determination of eligibility for the CRHR. If any historic property would be adversely affected, 
North Baja would be required to prepare treatment plans indicating how impacts would be reduced or 
mitigated. Once a treatment plan is approved, a Memorandum of Agreement would be executed by the 
appropriate parties. North Baja would implement the specific treatment measures before Project 
construction is authorized by the FERC and the CSLC in any given area. Implementation of treatment 
would occur only after certification of the proposed Project. Implementation of treatment would ensure 
that Project-related adverse effects would be resolved for purposes of section 106 compliance, and 
reduced to less than significant levels for the purposes of NEPA compliance. 

Generally under the CEQA, a project that follows the Secretary of Interior’s Standards shall be 
considered as mitigated to a level of less than a significant impact on the historical resources. However, 
in some cases, documentation as mitigation is not sufficient to reduce the impact to a level that is less than 
significant (State CEQA Guidelines section 15126.4[b][2]). Thus, documentation of an “historical 
resource” may not necessarily mitigate the effects “to a point where clearly no significant effect on the 
environment would occur” as it does under section 106. Archaeological sites that are important for their 
data alone can usually be mitigated through data recovery (excavation). 

To ensure that the FERC’s responsibilities under the NHPA and its implementing regulations and 
the CSLC’s responsibilities under the CEQA are met, the Agency Staffs recommend that: 

• North Baja shall defer implementation of any treatment plans/mitigation measures 
(including archaeological data recovery), construction of facilities, and use of all 
staging, storage, or temporary work areas and new or to-be-improved access roads 
until: 


a. North Baja files the California SHPO’s comments on Addendum Report 2 
and the Evaluation Plan; 

b. North Baja provides Addendum Report 3 to the BLM, and files any BLM 
and BOR comments on Addendum Report 3 and the Evaluation Plan, as 
appropriate; 

c. North Baja files any FWS, Cibola NWR comments on the Overview and 
Survey Report and the Evaluation Plan; 

d. North Baja files with the FERC and the CSLC (for the California portion of 
the Project), as well as the SHPO(s); the BLM; the BOR; and the FWS, 
Cibola NWR, as appropriate, all additional cultural resources survey 
reports for denied access areas and any additional areas requiring survey, 
evaluation reports, and any necessary treatment plans; 

e. North Baja files the comments of the SHPO(s); the BLM; the BOR; and the 
FWS, Cibola NWR, as appropriate, on all additional cultural resources 
survey reports and plans; 


4-194 



f. the CSLC reviews and approves all cultural resources reports and plans 
prepared for the California portion of the Project and notifies North Baja in 
writing that construction may proceed; 

g. the ACHP is afforded an opportunity to comment, if historic properties 
would be adversely affected; and 

h. the Director of OEP notifies North Baja in writing that treatment 
plans/mitigation measures may be implemented or construction may 
proceed. 

All material filed with the FERC containing location, character, and ownership 
information about cultural resources must have the cover and any relevant pages 
therein clearly labeled in bold lettering: “ CONTAINS PRIVILEGED 
INFORMATION - DO NOT RELEASE.” 


4.11.7 Arrowhead Alternative 

North Baja surveyed a 92- to 100-foot-wide corridor along the Arrowhead Alternative pipeline 
route on Arrowhead Boulevard. Between MPs 0.0 and 1.0, the survey corridor was 92 feet centered over 
the paved road, which included the 60-foot-wide construction right-of-way and 16 feet on each side. A 
100-foot-wide corridor adjacent to and east of the road pavement was surveyed for the portion of the 
pipeline route between MPs 1.0 and 1.5. A 100-foot-wide corridor adjacent to and west of the road 
pavement was surveyed for the portion of the pipeline route between MPs 1.5 and 2.0. The aboveground 
facility sites and temporary extra workspaces associated with the Arrowhead Alternative were also 
surveyed. 

North Baja’s surveys identified six historic cultural resources, one of which (the C-05 Canal) was 
previously recorded. The remaining five cultural resources consist of two wood pole utility lines and 
three unnamed canals. All six cultural resources identified are unevaluated for eligibility for listing on the 
NRHP and the CRHR. The wood pole utility lines would not be affected by construction. The 
Arrowhead Alternative pipeline would cross the C-05 Canal and two of the unnamed canals. The 
unnamed canals are private ditches that are not part of the PVID irrigation system. North Baja would 
cross the two unnamed canals using the open-cut method and would restore the canals to their previous 
condition after construction. North Baja would avoid impacts on the C-05 Canal by use of the bore 
crossing method. If the Arrowhead Alternative were adopted and an unevaluated resource cannot be 
avoided, the resource would be evaluated for NRHP and CRHR eligibility. 

Once cultural resources surveys and evaluations are complete, the FERC, in consultation with the 
California SHPO, would make determinations of eligibility and Project effects. If historic properties 
would be adversely affected, the process outlined in Section 4.11.6 would be followed. 

4.11.8 No Project Alternative 

Under the No Project Alternative, the FERC would deny North Baja’s application for a 
Certificate and a Presidential Permit amendment, the CSLC would deny North Baja’s application for an 
amendment to its right-of-way lease across California’s Sovereign and School Lands, and the BLM would 
deny North Baja’s application to amend its existing Right-of-Way Grant and obtain a Temporary Use 
Permit for the portion of the Project on Federal lands. The No Project Alternative means that the Project 
would not go forward and the Project-related facilities would not be installed. Accordingly, none of the 


4-195 






potential environmental impacts identified for the construction and operation of the proposed Project 
would occur. 

Because the proposed Project is privately funded, it is unknown whether North Baja would fund 
another energy project in California. However, should the No Project Alternative be selected, the energy 
needs identified in Section 1.1 would likely be addressed through other means, such as through other 
LNG or natural gas-related pipeline projects. Such projects may result in potential environmental impacts 
of the nature and magnitude of the proposed Project as well as impacts particular to their respective 
configurations and operations; however, these impacts cannot be predicted with any certainty at this time. 


4-196 


4.12 AIR QUALITY 

4.12.1 Significance Criteria 

An adverse impact on air quality would be considered significant and would require mitigation if 
Project construction or operation would: 

• conflict with or obstruct implementation of an applicable air quality or attainment plan; 

• violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air 
quality violation; 

• result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the 
Project region is nonattainment under an applicable Federal or State ambient air quality 
standard (including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone 
precursors); 

• expose the public (especially schools, day care centers, hospitals, retirement homes, 
convalescence facilities, and residences) to substantial pollutant concentrations, including 
those resulting in a cancer risk greater than or equal to one in a million and/or a hazard 
index (non-cancerous risk) greater than or equal to 0.1; 

• impair air quality in a mandatory Class I Federal area; or 

• create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people or affecting a lesser 
number of people for a substantial duration. 

4.12.2 Existing Air Quality 

Climatic conditions in the Palo Verde Valley and the Imperial Valley, which include the entire 
Project area, are governed by the large-scale sinking and warming of air in the semi-permanent 
subtropical high-pressure center of the Pacific Ocean. The coastal mountains prevent the intrusion of 
cool, damp marine air, which results in the Palo Verde and Imperial Valleys experiencing clear skies, low 
humidity, extremely hot summers, and mild winters. Moderate winds and deep thermal convection are 
produced by the flat terrain of the valleys and the strong temperature differentials created by intense solar 
heating. The combination of subsiding air, protective mountains, and distance from the ocean all combine 
to severely limit precipitation. Rainfall is highly variable and usually amounts to less than 2 inches 
annually. Occasionally, heavy storms can produce rainfall that exceeds the annual average. 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards and Background Air Quality 

Ambient air quality is protected by Federal, State, and local regulations. The EPA has established 
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for criteria pollutants for the purpose of protecting 
human health (primary standards) and public welfare (secondary standards). These criteria pollutants are: 
nitrogen dioxide (N0 2 ), carbon monoxide (CO), ozone, S0 2 , lead (Pb), PM !0 , and PM 2 5 . 

The EPA established designations for a new 8-hour ozone standard, which are now in effect while 
the 1-hour ozone standard was revoked on June 15, 2005 in most areas, including the Project area. In 
addition to the Federal NAAQS, State ambient air quality standards have been established for Arizona 
and California. The Arizona ambient air quality standards are the same as the Federal standards. 


4-197 


California has adopted ambient air quality standards that are stricter than the Federal standards with the 
exception of the 8-hour CO standard. 

The existing ambient air concentrations in the Project area were evaluated by reviewing 
representative air monitoring data from Imperial County and Riverside County monitoring locations in 
the Salton Sea and Mojave Desert Air Basins for the years 2003 through 2005. Table 4.12.2-1 lists the 
Federal and State ambient air quality standards and the background values estimated for each of the 
pollutants and averaging periods. These monitoring data show that the existing ambient air 
concentrations for ozone, PM )0 , and PM 25 are above the Federal and State ambient air quality standards 
while the concentrations for Pb, N0 2 , and S0 2 are below the Federal and State ambient air quality 
standards. CO ambient concentrations are below the Federal standards for both the 1-hour and 8-hour 
averaging periods. Flowever, the 1-hour CO concentration exceeds the State ambient air quality standard. 


TABLE 4.12.2-1 


Federal and State Air Quality Standards and Existing Air Quality in the Project Area 

Pollutant 

Averaging Period 

Federal/Arizona 
Primary Standards 

Federal/Arizona 
Secondary Standard 

California 

Standards 

Highest Background 
Values 3 

o 3 

1 Hour 

- 

Same as Primary 

0.09 ppm 

0.159 ppm b 


8 Hour 

0.08 ppm 


0.070 ppm 

0.127 ppm c 

PM 10 

24 Hour 

150 gg/m 3 

Same as Primary 

50 gg/m 3 

227 gg/m 3 b 


Annual AM d 

50 gg/m 3 


20 gg/m 3 

75 gg/m 3 d 

PM 2 .5 

24 Hour 

65 gg/m 3 

Same as Primary 

- 

77 gg/m 3 e 


Annual AM 

15 gg/m 3 


12 gg/m 3 

24.8 gg/m 3d 

Pb 

Quarter 

1,5pg/m 3 

Same as Primary 

1.5 gg/m 3 

0.02 gg/m 3 d 

CO 

1 Hour 

35 ppm 

None 

10 ppm 

12.4 ppm b 


8 Hour 

9 ppm 


9.0 ppm 

8.6 ppm b 

no 2 

1 Hour 

- 

Same as Primary 

0.25 ppm 



Annual AM 

0.053 ppm 


- 

0.022 ppm d 

S0 2 

1 Hour 

- 

- 

0.25 ppm 



3 Hour 

- 

0.5 ppm 

- 



24 Hour 

0.14 ppm 

- 

0.04 ppm 

0.015 ppm b 


Annual AM 

0.030 ppm 

- 

- 



Background value is the highest value reported by the EPA for the years 2003 through 2005 for monitors located in 
Imperial County and Riverside County. 

b Second highest value. 

Fourth highest value. 
d Arithmetic mean. 

98th percentile value. 

0 3 = Ozone 

PM io — particulate matter having an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to 10 microns 
PM 2 . 5 = particulate matter having an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to 2.5 microns 
Pb = lead 

CO = carbon monoxide 
N0 2 = nitrogen dioxide 
S0 2 = sulfur dioxide 
NA = No data available 
ppm = parts per million 

Note: The lead standard for California is a 30-day averaging period. 


4-198 






Air Quality Control Regions (AQCRs) and Attainment Status 

The AQCRs were established by the EPA and local agencies, in accordance with section 107 of 
the Clean Air Act (CAA), as a means to implement the CAA and comply with the NAAQS through State 
implementation plans. The AQCRs are intra- and interstate regions such as large metropolitan areas 
where the improvement of the air quality in one portion of the AQCR requires emission reductions 
throughout the AQCR. Each AQCR, or portion thereof, is designated as attainment, unclassifiable, 
maintenance, or nonattainment for the NAAQS. The designations are based on compliance with the 
NAAQS. Areas where the ambient air pollutant concentration is determined to be below the applicable 
ambient air quality standard are designated attainment. Areas where no data are available are designated 
unclassifiable. Areas where the ambient air concentration is greater than the applicable ambient air 
quality standard are designated nonattainment. Areas that have been designated nonattainment but have 
since demonstrated compliance with the ambient air quality standard(s) are designated maintenance for 
that pollutant. Maintenance areas are treated similar to attainment areas for the permitting of stationary 
sources; however, specific provisions may be incorporated through the State's approved maintenance plan 
to ensure that the air quality would remain in compliance with the ambient air quality standard(s) for that 
pollutant. 

La Paz County, Arizona is designated as attainment or unclassifiable for all criteria pollutants. 
Portions of Riverside and Imperial Counties that are within the Project area are designated as 
nonattainment for ozone and PM i0 and attainment for all other criteria pollutants including PM 2 5 . 

4.12.3 Regulatory Requirements 

The proposed Project is potentially subject to a variety of Federal, State, and local regulations 
pertaining to the construction or operation of air emission sources. The CAA, 42 USC 7401 et seq., as 
amended in 1977 and 1990, and Title 40 CFR Parts 50 through 99 are the basic Federal statutes and 
regulations governing air pollution in the United States. The ADEQ is the governing agency for the 
portion of the Project that passes through La Paz County, Arizona. The Mojave Desert Air Quality 
Management District (AQMD) and the ICAPCD are the governing agencies for the portions of the Project 
within California. 

The North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project would involve modifications at the existing 
Ehrenberg Compressor Station, El Paso Meter Station, and Ogilby Meter Station to allow northbound 
flow of natural gas. The Project would also involve the construction of 126.1 miles of natural gas 
pipeline, an odorant facility, 2 meter stations, 13 valves, 3 pig launchers, 4 pig receivers, and a tap. 
Except for the construction equipment and activities associated with building these facilities, there would 
be no air emissions generated by these aboveground or pipeline facilities (i.e., no emissions would occur 
during operation). 

Federal Air Quality Requirements 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Nonattainment New Source Review (NSR) - 

Ambient air quality is protected by the EPA’s PSD and Nonattainment NSR programs. The PSD 
regulations apply to new major stationary sources or major modifications to stationary sources located in 
attainment areas. The Nonattainment NSR regulations apply to new or modified stationary sources 
located in nonattainment areas. The PSD regulations, as codified in Title 40 CFR Part 52.21, define a 
major source or major modification as: 


4-199 



• a source with a potential-to-emit (PTE) of more than 100 tons per year (tpy) of any 
criteria pollutant for a facility that is one of the 28 industrial source categories listed in 
Title 40 CFR Part 52.2l(b)(l)(i)(a); 

• a source with a PTE of more than 250 tpy of any criteria pollutant for a facility that is not 
one of the 28 industrial source categories listed in Title 40 CFR Part 52.21 (b)( 1 )(i)(a); 

• a modification to an existing major source that results in a net emissions increase greater 
than the PSD significant emission rate specified in Title 40 CFR Part 52.21 (b)(23)(i); or 

• an existing minor source proposing a modification that is major by itself. 

One of the factors considered in the PSD permit review processes is potential impacts on 
protected Class 1 Federal areas. If a project is located within 100 kilometers of a Federal Class I area, 
additional modeling analysis may be required to determine the potential impact on the area. The 
Nonattainment NSR/PSD requirements apply to stationary sources. The proposed Project would not 
have any stationary source emissions associated with the operation of the Project; therefore, the Project is 
not subject to the Nonattainment NSR/PSD requirements. Because the modifications at the existing 
Ehrenberg Compressor Station would not trigger PSD review, an air quality impact determination would 
not be required. Additionally, the Project would not be located within 100 kilometers of a Federal Class I 
area; therefore, additional modeling analysis would not be necessary and it can be assumed that the 
potential for the Project to impact air quality in any Federal Class 1 areas would be less than significant. 

Other Federal regulations (e.g., the New Source Performance Standards, the National Emission 
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants, and Title V of the CAA) that only apply to stationary sources are 
not applicable as well. 

Mobile Source Regulations - Title II of the CAA Amendments of 1990 contains provisions 
relating to highway and off-road mobile sources. Regulations aimed at reducing pollution from heavy- 
duty diesel engines, including marine and locomotive engines, that have been promulgated or proposed 
include: 

• Title 40 CFR Parts 69, 80, and 86, Final Rule, Control of Air Pollution from New Motor 
Vehicles: Heavy-Duty Engine and Vehicle Standards and Highway Diesel Fuel Sulfur 
Control Requirements - This rule requires a reduction in emissions from on-road diesel 
engines and establishes sulfur limits for diesel fuel. Currently, the requirements are for 
new engines only and the standards will begin to take effect in model year 2007. 
Although the emissions standards are for new engines only, the reduced sulfur diesel fuel, 
which is required to have a sulfur content less than 0.05 percent (500 parts per million by 
weight [ppmw]), a limit that is to be lowered to 15 ppmw starting in June 2006, would 
also reduce particulate and sulfur oxides (SO x ) emissions from existing diesel engines. 

• Title 40 CFR Parts 9 and 69 et al., Final Rule, Control of Emissions of Air Pollution from 
Non-road Diesel Engines and Fuel - This rule requires emissions reductions from non¬ 
road diesel engines by establishing emissions limits and sulfur content limits. This rule 
targets agricultural equipment, construction equipment, and other non-road diesel 
engines. As with the previous rule, the reduced sulfur fuel would lower emissions from 
existing diesel engines even though the emissions limits would only apply to new 
engines. 


4-200 



Both non-road and highway use vehicles and construction equipment used for the Project would 
be required to use the new low sulfur diesel fuel as soon as it is commercially available. 

General Conformity Determination - The EPA promulgated the General Conformity Rule on 
November 30, 1993 in Volume 58 of the Federal Register (FR) Page 63214 (58 FR 63214) to implement 
the conformity provision of Title I, section 176(c)(1) of the CAA. Section 176(c)(1) requires that the 
Federal government not engage, support, or provide financial assistance for licensing or permitting, or 
approving any activity not conforming to an approved CAA implementation plan. 

The General Conformity Rule is codified in Title 40 CFR Part 51, Subpart W and Part 93, 
Subpart B, Determining Conformity of General Federal Actions to State or Federal Implementation 
Plans. The General Conformity Rule applies to all Federal actions except programs and projects requiring 
funding or approval from the DOT, the Federal Highway Administration, the Federal Transit 
Administration, or the Metropolitan Planning Organization. In lieu of a conformity analysis, these latter 
types of programs and projects must comply with the Transportation Conformity Rule promulgated by the 
DOT on November 24, 1993 (58 FR 62197). 

As previously stated, the General Conformity Rule applies to projects that are located in 
nonattainment or maintenance areas. One segment of the Project is located in a serious PM 10 
nonattainment area within Imperial County as well as a Subpart 2 marginal ozone nonattainment area in 
Imperial County. The Project does not include any nonattainment areas within Arizona and is not located 
within any maintenance areas. Relevant general conformity regulations for the two jurisdictions with 
nonattainment areas include the ICAPCD Regulation IX, Rule 925, adopted on November 29, 1994; and 
the Mojave Desert AQMD Rule 2002, adopted on October 26, 1994. Rules 925 and 2002 were approved 
in revisions to both the California and Arizona State Implementation Plans (SIPs) in the Federal Register 
on April 23, 1999 (64 FR 19916). 

General conformity assessments must be completed when the total direct and indirect emissions 
of a planned project would equal or exceed specified pollutant thresholds per year in each nonattainment 
area. With regard to the proposed Project, the relevant general conformity pollutant thresholds are: 

• PM| 0: 70 tpy for projects located in serious nonattainment areas; or 

• ozone precursors: 100 tpy of VOC or NO x for projects located in ozone nonattainment 
areas that are not within an ozone transport region and are not classified as serious, 
severe, or extreme. 

As discussed in Section 4.12.4, Project emissions would be below general conformity thresholds; 
therefore, a general conformity determination is not required. 

State Air Quality Requirements 

Because there would be no stationary sources or operational emissions associated with the 
proposed Project, the stationary source permitting requirements of the ADEQ, the Mojave Desert AQMD, 
and the ICAPCD do not apply. 

Fugitive dust regulations adopted by the ADEQ, the Mojave Desert AQMD, and the ICAPCD do 
apply to the construction activities associated with the proposed Project. Table 4.12.3-1 lists the fugitive 
dust and opacity regulations that apply to the Project. These requirements include EPA Reasonably 
Available Control Measures such as using wetting agents, dust suppressants, and other means to prevent 


4-201 



particulates from becoming airborne. Permits are not required for pipeline construction emissions from 
any of the above-noted agencies. 


TABLE 4.12.3-1 

Fugitive Emissions (Dust) Rules 

Agency 

Rule Number 

Rule Description 

ADEQ 

R18-2-604 

Construction fugitive dust limitations 


R18-2-605 

Road construction fugitive dust limitations 


R18-2-606 

Material handling fugitive dust limitations 


R18-02-607 

Storage pile fugitive dust limitations 


R18-2-702 

Visible emission limitations 


R18-2-802 

Off-road machinery opacity limitations 


R18-2-804 

Roadway and site clearing opacity limitations 

Mojave Desert AQMD 

401 

Visible emission limitations 


402 

Nuisance 


403 

Fugitive dust control 

ICAPCD 

401 

Visible emission limitations 


407 

Nuisance 


800-805 

Fugitive dust control rules 


Although C0 2 is not a regulated pollutant, it is associated with greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, 
along with other gases such as methane and chlorofluorocarbons. GHG emissions are vital to life on earth 
because they help to maintain ambient temperatures. However, excess GHG emissions augment this 
effect and contribute to overall global climatic changes, typically referred to as global warming. CO? 
emissions are a product of fossil fuel combustion and tropical forest destruction, which are human 
activities that contribute to global climatic changes. Large quantities of GHG emissions would decrease 
the amount of infrared or heat energy radiated by the earth back to space and upset the heat balance. 
Global warming may ultimately contribute to a rise in sea level, destruction of estuaries and coastal 
wetlands, and changes in regional temperature and rainfall pattern, with significant agricultural and 
coastal community implications. 

4.12.4 Air Emission Impacts and Mitigation 

Construction activities for the proposed facilities (including the pipeline) would take place in the 
following four sequences: site preparation/trenching; foundation work; installation of equipment, 
structures, and pipeline; and right-of-way/site restoration. The anticipated construction periods for the 
various components of the proposed Project are described in Section 2.4. As discussed in Section 2.4, 
construction of Phase I would occur over a 2-month period in 2007, construction of Phase I-A would 
occur over a 2- to 4-month period in 2008 and 2009, and construction of Phase II would occur over a 4- to 
6-month period in 2009. The construction activities that would generate emissions include land clearing, 
ground excavation, and cut and fill operations. These construction activities would occur 6 days per week 
for up to 12 hours per day during the construction periods. The intermittent and short-term emissions 
generated by these activities would include dust from soil disruption and combustion emissions from the 
construction equipment. Emissions associated with construction equipment include PM| 0 , PM 25 , N0 2 , 
CO, volatile organic compounds (VOC), S0 2 . and small amounts of air toxics. These emissions could 
result in minor, temporary impacts on air quality in the vicinity of pipeline installation. Table 4.12.4-1 
lists the estimated emissions of these criteria pollutants that would be generated by construction of the 
proposed Project facilities by year of construction in attainment and nonattainment areas. 


4-202 





TABLE 4.12.4-1 


Estimated Emissions of Criteria Pollutants from Project Construction by Year 


Source Category 

PM 10 

(tons) 

PM 25 

(tons) 

NO x 

(tons) 

CO 

(tons) 

so* 

(tons) 

VOC 

(tons) 

2007/BEI Lateral/Riverside County/Attainment Area a 

Construction Equipment b 

0.17 

0.16 

3.15 

1.26 

0.58 

0.29 

Fugitive Dust 

2.19 

0.26 

0.00 

0.00 

0.00 

0.00 

Commuter T raffic 

0.00 

0.00 

0.01 

0.05 

0.00 

0.01 

Delivery Vehicles 

0.01 

0.01 

0.33 

.18 

0.00 

.02 

2007 Attainment Area Total 

2.37 

0.43 

3.49 

1.49 

0.58 

0.32 

2008/IID Lateral/Imperial County/Nonattainment Area 

Construction Equipment b 

0.44 

0.40 

8.41 

3.36 

1.57 

0.77 

Fugitive Dust 

31.76 

4.77 

0.00 

0.00 

0.00 

0.00 

Commuter Traffic 

0.01 

0.01 

0.17 

1.61 

0.00 

0.17 

Delivery Vehicles 

0.17 

0.16 

9.21 

2.57 

0.13 

0.45 

2008 Nonattainment Area Total 

32.38 

5.34 

17.79 

7.54 

1.70 

1.39 

2009/IID Lateral/Imperial County/Nonattainment Area 

Construction Equipment b 

0.05 

0.05 

1.04 

0.41 

0.19 

0.10 

Fugitive Dust 

3.93 

0.59 

0.00 

0.00 

0.00 

0.00 

Commuter T raffic 

0.00 

0.00 

0.02 

0.20 

0.00 

0.02 

Delivery Vehicles 

0.02 

0.02 

1.14 

0.32 

0.02 

0.06 

2009/ B-Line/Imperial County/Nonattainment Area 

Construction Equipment b 

0.58 

0.54 

10.76 

4.43 

1.98 

1.03 

Fugitive Dust 

45.92 

7.53 

0.00 

0.00 

0.00 

0.00 

Commuter Traffic 

0.01 

0.01 

0.10 

0.93 

0.00 

0.10 

Delivery Vehicles 

0.18 

0.17 

9.40 

6.20 

0.02 

0.88 

2009 Nonattainment Area Total 

50.69 

8.91 

22.46 

12.49 

2.21 

2.19 

2009/B-Line/Riverside County/Attainment Area 

Construction Equipment b 

0.44 

0.40 

8.14 

3.36 

1.50 

0.78 

Fugitive Dust 

34.74 

5.70 

0.00 

0.00 

0.00 

0.00 

Commuter Traffic 

0.01 

0.01 

0.08 

0.70 

0.00 

0.08 

Delivery Vehicles 

0.13 

0.13 

7.11 

4.69 

0.01 

0.67 

2009/B-Line/lmperial County/Attainment Area 

Construction Equipment b 

0.65 

0.60 

12.12 

4.96 

2.24 

1.15 

Fugitive Dust 

40.5 

6.54 

0.00 

0.00 

0.00 

0.00 

Commuter Traffic 

0.01 

0.01 

0.09 

0.83 

0.00 

0.09 

Delivery Vehicles 

0.16 

0.15 

8.17 

5.35 

0.01 

0.75 

2009 Attainment Area Total 

76.64 

13.54 

35.71 

19.89 

3.76 

3.52 


The odorant facility in Imperial County would also be constructed in 2007. Emissions generated by the construction 
activities would be negligible. 

Construction equipment emissions include both on- and non-road construction equipment. _ 


Emissions from construction of the pipeline and aboveground facilities are not expected to cause 
or significantly contribute to a violation of an applicable ambient air quality standard or contribute 
substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation because the construction equipment would be 
operated on an as-needed basis during daylight hours only and the emissions from gasoline and diesel 
engines would be minimized because the engines must be built to meet the standards for mobile sources 
established by the EPA mobile source emission regulations including those in Title 40 CFR Part 85. 
Most of the construction equipment would be powered by diesel engines and would be equipped with 
typical control equipment (e.g., catalytic converters), and Project-related vehicles and construction 


4-203 









equipment would be required to use the new low sulfur diesel fuel as soon as it is commercially available. 
In addition, North Baja would implement the following measures to minimize impacts on air resources. 

• minimize idling time for diesel equipment whenever possible; 

• ensure that diesel-powered construction equipment is properly tuned and maintained, and 
shut off when not in direct use; 

• prohibit engine tampering to increase horsepower; 

• use California Air Resources Board-certified low sulfur diesel fuel (less than 15 parts per 
million); and 

• reduce construction-related trips as feasible for workers and equipment, including trucks. 

Fugitive dust emissions (e.g., PM 10 ) would depend on the moisture content and texture of the 
soils that would be disturbed. The construction emissions would vary from day to day depending on the 
level of activity, the specific operations, and prevailing weather. The fugitive dust emissions due to 
construction activities on the pipeline segments as listed in Table 4.12.4-1 were estimated using an 
uncontrolled emission factor of 0.11 tons/acre-month based on a study conducted for the South Coast 
AQMD by the Midwest Research Institute (1996). Typically, the emission factor in the EPA’s AP-42 
Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors is used; however, the Agency Staffs used the more 
relevant South Coast AQMD factor. 5 The emission factor for estimating fugitive dust from unpaved 
roads is based on empirical equations that include several factors, including silt content of the soil, 
average vehicle weight, and surface moisture content under natural conditions. The equation for 
estimating the emission factor for unpaved roads is found in AP-42, Section 13.2.2. The calculated 
emission factor for unpaved roads includes an assumed average silt content of 25 percent (average value 
derived from the Eastern Imperial County and Eastern Riverside County soil survey data), an average 
vehicle weight of 4.3 tons, and a surface soil moisture content of 1 percent. The number of days with 
measurable rain (greater than 0.01 inch) is also taken into account. The emissions estimate for worker 
travel (commuter traffic) includes the use of multi-passenger vehicles to transport construction workers 
from central staging areas. 

Fugitive dust generated by construction activities would be minimized by the implementation of 
North Baja’s Dust Control Plan (see Appendix L). The Dust Control Plan includes control measures 
identified as best management practices by the regulating agencies. The measures that would be 
implemented include: 

• take every reasonable precaution to minimize fugitive dust emissions from construction 
activities; 

• take every reasonable measure to limit visible density (opacity) of emissions to less than 
or equal to 20 percent; 

• apply water one or more times per day to all affected unpaved roads, and unpaved haul 
and access roads; 

• reduce vehicle speeds on all unpaved roads, and unpaved haul and access roads; 


The Mojave Desert AQMD has not developed its own emission factor. 


4-204 



• clean up track-out and/or carry-out areas at paved road access points at a minimum of 
once every 48 hours; 

• if bulk transfer operations are required, spray handling and transfer points with water at 
least 15 minutes before use; 

• cover all haul truck loads, or maintain at least 6 inches of freeboard space in each cargo 
compartment. Ensure that all haul truck cargo compartments are constructed and 
maintained to minimize spillage and loss of materials, and clean or wash each cargo 
compartment at the delivery site after removal of the bulk materials; 

• apply water to active construction areas to limit visible density (opacity) of emissions to 
less than or equal to 20 percent; 

• apply water to open and/or unvegetated areas to limit visible density (opacity) of 
emissions to less than or equal to 20 percent; and 

• for temporary surfaces during periods of inactivity, restrict vehicular access by means of 
either fencing or signage, and apply water to comply with the stabilized surface 
requirements. 

Although many of these measures clearly specify the performance requirement, some of the 
measures are vague and open to interpretation and, consequently, would be difficult to enforce during 
construction. Therefore, the Agency Staffs recommend that: 

• North Baja shall file a revised Dust Control Plan with the FERC and the CSLC for 
the review and written approval of the Director of OEP and the Executive Officer of 
the CSLC before construction . The revised plan shall specify the following: 

a. the precautions that would be taken to minimize fugitive dust emissions 
from construction activities; 

b. the measures that would be taken to limit visible density (opacity) of 
emissions to less than or equal to 20 percent; 

c. the individuals with authority to determine if/when water needs to be 
reapplied for dust control; 

d. the individuals with authority to stop work if the contractor does not comply 
with dust control measures; 

e. the speed limit that would be required on unpaved roads and unpaved haul 
and access roads; 

f. how visual density would be measured to determine that it is less than or 
equal to 20 percent; and 

g. how compliance with the 20 percent visual density requirement would be 
recorded. 


4-205 



With the implementation of the Agency Staffs’ recommendation, fugitive dust from Project 
construction activities is not expected to result in a violation of Federal or State ambient air quality 
standards or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation due to the transient 
and temporary nature of the construction activities. Further, all activities would be done in compliance 
with each agency’s rules and regulations. 

Construction of the Project would generate emissions of non-regulated GHG. C0 2 would be 
formed as a primary product of combustion of the diesel and gas engines used to power construction 
equipment and vehicles. 

None of the proposed facilities would result in increased air emissions of criteria pollutants 
during operation; however, emissions of GHG could occur. Direct releases of methane could occur as a 
result of pipeline repair or maintenance operations. These releases would be infrequent over the lifetime 
of the Project and would likely involve only an isolated section of pipeline resulting in a negligible 
increase in GHG emissions. 

The odorant facility could result in a potential for offsite odor. As discussed in Section 2.1.2, 
North Baja proposes to install an odorant facility at the existing Ogilby Meter Station in Imperial County 
to odorize the natural gas before delivery into the SoCal Gas system. The odorant facility would consist 
of three 6,000-gallon steel tanks in a small building. The tanks would contain the odorant liquid, which is 
a non-toxic chemical called mercaptan. The mercaptan would be injected into the natural gas stream in 
small amounts to give it a distinctive odor to alert people to the presence of leaking natural gas. 

In the unlikely event the odorant liquid is spilled, the material would evaporate and disperse 
quickly, particularly under warmer ambient conditions, giving off a strong sulphurous odor. There are no 
residences or commercial developments in the vicinity of the Ogilby Meter Station; however, the smell 
would have the potential to be perceived by motorists on Interstate 8 and Ogilby Road, or by recreational 
users in the vicinity. Although not considered a health risk, the smell is unpleasant and can be alarming. 

To reduce the potential for release, the steel odorant tanks would be designed to be vapor tight. 
Associated equipment would be designed to minimize the potential for odorant release during transfer, 
storage, and use of the odorant. The odorant tanks would be located in a concrete-floored building 
designed to contain any spilled odorant liquid within the building. The building would have a sump 
equipped with a manually operated drain valve that is normally closed and capped. Consequently, the 
potential for liquids to spill outside the building would be very remote. 

Depending on flow volumes, the odorant would be delivered to the Ogilby Meter Station by truck 
approximately once a month. The odorant would be transferred from a delivery truck into each storage 
tank at the fill station area, which would be piped to the storage tanks. The fill station would be covered 
and bermed with concrete and designed to contain liquids should a release occur during transfer. The 
transfer of odorant into the storage tanks would be completed by the supplier utilizing a closed-loop 
system where odorant vapors are pumped from the storage tanks into the vendor transport tanker. Odorant 
would be injected into the pipelines from the injection systems located in the odorant storage building. 
North Baja would frequently inspect the odorant transfer, storage, and injection systems as part of routine 
maintenance to reduce the potential for spills to occur. In addition, North Baja would prepare a site- 
specific spill response plan to be implemented in case of an odorant release. This plan would address 
anticipated spill scenarios, release response actions, personal protective equipment, spill 
neutralization/cleanup, emergency responder coordination, and public communication. North Baja would 
submit the plan to the FERC, the CSLC, and the BLM for review and approval before operation. 


4-206 


The siting of the odorant facility at a relatively remote location, the specific design features of the 
facility, and North Baja’s adherence to its inspection and maintenance procedures as well as its 
implementation of the site-specific spill response plan would minimize the potential for the Project to 
create objectionable odors that would affect a substantial number of people or affecting a lesser number of 
people for a substantial duration. 

Potential cumulative impacts related to construction and operation of the North Baja Pipeline 
Expansion Project, including the potential for the Project to result in a considerable net increase of any 
criteria pollutant for which the Project region is nonattainment, are addressed in Section 4.15. 

During the scoping process, comments were received from the ICAPCD that the natural gas 
transported by the proposed Project would have the potential for large NO x increases if it were derived 
from high British thermal units LNG. The ICAPCD also commented that the U.S. standards for gas 
quality and the Wobbe Index (heating value) are inadequate to protect air quality in the United States and 
requested that a comparison of the U.S. and Mexican standards be provided. As discussed in Section 1.1, 
the terms of the precedent agreements between North Baja and its shippers require that the gas delivered 
to the North Baja system meet the most stringent gas quality standard of any of the pipelines to which the 
North Baja system might ultimately deliver the gas. These requirements mean that either the gas 
delivered to the Baja California terminals will meet the most stringent gas quality standard, or the 
terminal will have to process the gas before delivering it to the pipelines to meet this standard. 

4.12.5 Health Risk Assessment 

A Health Risk Assessment was not conducted for the proposed Project because it would not result 
in increased operational emissions. Therefore, the potential for the Project to expose the public to 
substantial pollutant concentrations, including those resulting in a cancer risk greater than or equal to one 
in a million and/or a hazard index (non-cancerous risk) greater than or equal to 0.1, would be less than 
significant. 

A Health Risk Assessment was conducted to address the cumulative impacts associated with 
nonjurisdictional upstream facilities (see Section 4.15). 

4.12.6 Arrowhead Alternative 

The impacts of construction of the Arrowhead Alternative on air quality would be similar to those 
of the corresponding segment of the proposed Project. Like the corresponding segment of the proposed 
Project, the Arrowhead Alternative would not generate any operational air emissions. Because an odorant 
facility would not be required, there would be no potential for the Arrowhead Alternative to create 
objectionable odors that would affect a substantial number of people. 

4.12.7 No Project Alternative 

Under the No Project Alternative, the FERC would deny North Baja’s application for a 
Certificate and a Presidential Permit amendment, the CSLC would deny North Baja’s application for an 
amendment to its right-of-way lease across California’s Sovereign and School Lands, and the BLM would 
deny North Baja’s application to amend its existing Right-of-Way Grant and obtain a Temporary Use 
Permit for the portion of the Project on Federal lands. The No Project Alternative means that the Project 
would not go forward and the Project-related facilities would not be installed. Accordingly, none of the 
potential environmental impacts identified for the construction and operation of the proposed Project 
would occur. 


4-207 


Because the proposed Project is privately funded, it is unknown whether North Baja would fund 
another energy project in California. However, should the No Project Alternative be selected, the energy 
needs identified in Section 1.1 would likely be addressed through other means, such as through other 
LNG or natural gas-related pipeline projects. Such projects may result in potential environmental impacts 
of the nature and magnitude of the proposed Project as well as impacts particular to their respective 
configurations and operations; however, these impacts cannot be predicted with any certainty at this time. 


4-208 


4.13 NOISE 


4.13.1 Significance Criteria 

An adverse impact on environmental noise levels would be considered significant and would 
require mitigation if Project construction or operation would cause: 

• exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in 
the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies; 

• exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground-borne vibration or ground- 
borne noise levels; 

• substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity above levels 
existing without the Project; or 

• substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity 
above levels existing without the Project. 

4.13.2 Existing Noise Levels 

At any location, both the magnitude and frequency of environmental noise may vary considerably 
over the course of the day and throughout the week. This variation is caused in part by changing weather 
conditions and the effects of seasonal vegetative cover and human activity. Federal agencies use two 
measures to relate the time-varying quality of environmental noise to its known effect on people. The 
L eq ( 24 ) is the level of steady sound with the same total (equivalent) energy as the time-varying sound of 
interest, averaged over a 24-hour period. A second measure, the day-night equivalent sound level (L dn ) is 
calculated by adding 10 decibels on the A-weighted scale (dBA) to the nighttime sound levels between 
the hours of 10 PM and 7 AM to account for the greater sensitivity of people to sound during the 
nighttime hours. The A-weighted scale is used because human hearing is less sensitive to low and high 
frequencies than mid-range frequencies. The human ear’s threshold of perception for noise change is 3 
dBA. 


The Project would occur primarily in rural range, desert, and agricultural areas. Noise sources in 
rural areas are predominantly natural, including insects, birds, wind, and weather. Accordingly, existing 
ambient noise levels near most of the pipeline routes are low. Background noise levels in wilderness and 
rural areas typically range between 35 dBA and 45 dBA (L dn ). The primary sources of noise in the rural 
residential and agricultural areas are roadway traffic and farm machinery on a seasonal basis. 
Background noise levels are approximately 40 dBA in rural residential areas and 45 dBA in agricultural 
cropland with equipment operating (FERC 2002, EPA 1978). 

Noise-sensitive areas (NSAs) include residences, schools and day care facilities, hospitals, long¬ 
term care facilities, places of worship, libraries, and parks and recreational areas specifically known for 
their solitude and tranquility such as wilderness areas. The majority of the pipeline and aboveground 
facilities would be located in areas with little to no human population and few NSAs. 

The existing Ehrenberg Compressor Station is considered a noise-generating facility. Principal 
noise sources at the compressor station include the air inlet, exhaust, and casing of the engines. 
Secondary noise sources include cooling fans, yard piping, and valves. Post-construction noise 
compliance testing after the Ehrenberg Compressor Station was constructed and placed into service 
confirmed that noise levels at nearby NSAs were below the FERC’s limitation of 55 dBA L dn with the 


4-209 


power turbines for all three compressors operating simultaneously at maximum horsepower. The 
proposed modifications at the existing Ehrenberg Compressor Station would not increase operational 
noise levels at the station. 

4.13.3 Regulatory Requirements 

The FERC guidelines do not specifically cover operational noise for the North Baja Pipeline 
Expansion Project aboveground facilities such as the odorant facility, meter stations, launchers, or 
receivers. Neither the States of Arizona nor California have Statewide noise regulations that would limit 
noise from these facilities; noise is regulated at the local level in both States. 

In 1974, the EPA published Information on Levels of Environmental Noise Requisite to Protect 
Public Health and Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety (EPA 1974). This publication evaluates 
the effects of environmental noise with respect to health and safety, and provides information for State 
and local governments to use in developing their own ambient noise standards. The EPA has determined 
that in order to protect the public from activity interference and annoyance outdoors in residential areas, 
noise levels should not exceed an Ldn of 55 dBA. An L dn of 55 dBA is equivalent to a continuous noise 
level of 48.6 dBA for facilities that operate at a constant level of noise. The FERC has adopted the EPA 
guidelines. 

The State of California does not promulgate Statewide standards for environmental noise but 
requires each county to include a noise element in its general plan (California Government Code section 
65302[f]). In addition. Title 4 of the California Code of Regulations has guidelines for evaluating the 
compatibility of various land uses as a function of community noise exposure. 

The La Paz County, Arizona Department of Community Development has approved a nuisance 
ordinance that prohibits any actions that are “offensive to the senses.” No numerical standards for noise 
exist in the county. Imperial and Riverside Counties have community-based noise standards, which are 
implemented in the specific general plans for each region. 

Chapter 7 of the Riverside County General Plan contains a noise element that sets the basic 
community standards for noise levels and allowable impacts from a wide range of commercial and 
industrial activities, including construction noise. The Riverside County noise element identifies 
construction noise as a temporary impact and establishes a set of policies to deal with noise mitigation 
during construction activities. These policies are identified as N12.1, N12.2, and N12.4. These policies 
are in large part related to land use because of the effects of noise on sensitive land uses. Stationary 
source land use noise standards for Riverside County are presented in Table 4.13.3-1 (Riverside County 
2003). 


TABLE 4.13.3-1 

Stationary Source Land Use Noise Standards for Riverside County 

Land Use 

Interior Standards 3 

Exterior Standards 3 

Residential 



10:00 PM to 7:00 AM 

40 L eq (10 minute) 

45 Leq (10 minute) 

7:00 AM to 10:00 PM 

55 Leq (10 minute) 

65 Leq (10 minute) 

Leq (10 minute) = 

average noise level over a 10-minute period expressed in dBA. 



4-210 






The Imperial County General Plan also contains a community noise element that specifies the 
basic standards for acceptable noise levels from operational- (stationary) or construction-related sources 
as shown in Table 4.13.3-2. 


TABLE 4.13.3-2 


Noise Standards for Imperial County 

Operation Noise Standards 

Land Use Zone 

Time 

Applicable Limit 

Average Sound Level (dB) 

Residential Zones 

7 AM to 10 PM 

50 


10 PM to 7 AM 

45 

Multi-residential Zones 

7 AM to 10 PM 

55 


10 PM to 7 AM 

50 

Commercial Zone 

7 AM to 10 PM 

60 


10 PM to 7 AM 

55 

Light Industrial/Industrial Park Zones 

Anytime 

70 

General Industrial Zones 

Anytime 

75 


Construction Noise Standards 


Duration of 
Construction 

Noise Source 

Sound Level 
(dB Leq) a 

Period of Averaging 
(hours) 

Restricted Hours of Operation 

Short-term 
(days or weeks) 

Single piece of 

construction 

equipment 

75 

8 

7 AM to 7 PM Monday-Friday 

9 AM to 5 PM Saturday 

No commercial construction 
operation is permitted on Sundays 
and holidays. 

Short-term 
(days or weeks) 

Combination of 
pieces of 
construction 
equipment 

75 

8 

7 AM to 7 PM Monday-Friday 

9 AM to 5 PM Saturday 

No commercial construction is 
permitted on Sundays and Holidays 

Extended-term b 

Single piece of 

construction 

equipment 

75 

1 

7 AM to 7 PM Monday-Friday 

9 AM to 5 PM Saturday 

No commercial construction is 
permitted on Sundays and Holidays 

Extended-term b 

Combination of 
pieces of 
construction 
equipment 

75 

1 

7 AM to 7 PM Monday-Friday 

9 AM to 5 PM Saturday 

No commercial construction is 
permitted on Sundays and Holidays 


a As measured at the nearest sensitive receptor. 

b The standards assume a construction period, relative to an individual sensitive receptor, of days or weeks. The 

standard can be made more restrictive in cases of extended-length construction times. 

dB = decibel 

Source: County of Imperial General Plan Noise Element 1997c._ 


4.13.4 Noise Level Impacts and Mitigation 
Construction Noise 

Noise would be generated during construction of the pipeline and aboveground facilities. Noise 
associated with construction activities would be both temporary and intermittent because equipment 
would be operated on an as-needed basis during daylight hours. Therefore, the potential for construction 


4-211 










activities to result in the generation of or exposure of persons to excessive ground-borne vibration or 
ground-borne noise levels would be less than significant. 

The most prevalent sound source during construction is anticipated to be the internal combustion 
engines used to provide mobility and operating power to construction equipment. The sound level 
impacts at NSAs from construction operations would depend on the type of equipment used, the mode of 
operation of the equipment, the length of time the equipment is in use, the amount of equipment used 
simultaneously, and the distance between the sound source and sensitive site. All of these factors would 
constantly change throughout the construction period, making the calculation of an L dn or L eq and, hence, 
the quantification of impacts difficult. Table 4.13.4-1 presents generalized data on construction noise at 
typical construction sites and its potential impacts on receptors at specified distances from the 
construction corridor. In general, receptors at distances greater than 1,650 feet should not experience 
noise levels above the community standards, and receptors closer than 1,650 feet should only experience 
noise levels above the community standards on an intermittent basis during daylight hours. 


TABLE 4.13.4-1 

Typical Noise Levels from Construction Equipment and Operations 

Measured Noise Predicted Noise Predicted Noise Predicted Noise Predicted Noise 
Level at Level at Level at Level at Level at 3,000 

Equipment Type 50 feet (dBA) 500 feet (dBA) 1,000 feet (dBA) 2,000 feet (dBA) feet (dBA) 


Crane 

88 

68 

62 

56 

52 

Backhoe 

85 

65 

59 

53 

49 

Pan Loader 

87 

67 

61 

55 

51 

Bulldozer 

89 

69 

63 

57 

53 

Fuel Truck 

88 

68 

62 

56 

52 

Water Truck 

88 

68 

62 

56 

49 

Grader 

85 

65 

59 

53 

44 

Roller 

80 

60 

54 

48 

52 

Mechanic Truck 

88 

68 

62 

56 

52 

Flat Bed Truck 

88 

68 

62 

56 

52 

Dump Truck 

88 

68 

62 

56 

52 

T ractor 

80 

60 

62 

56 

44 

Concrete Truck 

86 

66 

60 

54 

50 

Concrete Pump 

82 

62 

56 

50 

46 

Front End Loader 

83 

63 

57 

51 

47 

Scraper 

87 

67 

61 

55 

51 

Air Compressor 

82 

62 

56 

50 

46 

Average Construction Site 

85 

66 

59 

53 

49 


dBA = decibels of the A-weighted scale. 


Pipeline construction would proceed at rates averaging about 1 mile per day. However, 
construction activities in any one area could last from several weeks to several months on an intermittent 
basis. Construction equipment would be operated on an as-needed basis during this period. Nighttime 
construction noise would be limited to HDDs at the Colorado River, All-American Canal, and the East 
Highline Canal crossings; hydrostatic testing activities; and bores under major highways or railroads. In 
some cases, these operations could require 24-hour work days; however, the duration of activities would 
be generally less than several days at road or railroad crossings although they could extend for up to 2 
weeks at the HDD crossings. Hydrostatic testing would be limited to one 24-hour interval at four to five 
scattered locations. 


4-212 






Although certain noise-generating activities associated with pipeline construction (e.g., HDDs 
and bore operations) would occur at a single location for extended time periods and include nighttime 
activities, most activities would occur for limited lengths of time at a specific location and would occur 
during daytime hours. Additionally, a majority of the activities would occur away from population 
centers; therefore, the potential for the Project to result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in 
ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity above levels existing without the Project would be less than 
significant. 

North Baja would comply with the noise elements included in the Riverside County and Imperial 
County General Plans; therefore, the potential for the Project to result in the exposure of persons to or 
generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, 
or applicable standards of other agencies would be less than significant. 

Operational Noise 

During operation, there may be short-term noise impacts from aboveground facilities due to 
vehicles and equipment performing routine maintenance. A more intense noise impact would result from 
the infrequent blowdowns at the valves that would be located at Blythe and Ogilby, the El Centro Meter 
Station, and the Ehrenberg Compressor Station. Blowdowns involve the evacuation of gas, which enables 
piping to be taken out of service, typically for major repairs or maintenance. Blowdowns occur only on 
rare occasions; therefore, the noise impacts would be infrequent and temporary. As an example, no 
blowdowns have occurred on North Baja’s existing system since it was placed in service 4 years ago. 
Despite the infrequency of blowdowns, in residential areas, North Baja would install silencers to reduce 
noise levels. In the event of a blowdown, nearby residences would be notified in advance if possible and 
North Baja would provide traffic control along public roadways near the blowdown location as needed. 
The proposed modifications at the Ehrenberg Compressor Station would not increase noise at the station 
during operation and operation of the odorant facility would not generate noise. Because the Project 
would not result in significant operational noise levels, the potential for the Project to result in a 
substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity above levels existing without 
the Project would be less than significant. 

4.13.5 Arrowhead Alternative 

The impacts of construction and operation of the Arrowhead Alternative on noise levels would be 
similar to those of the corresponding segment of the proposed Project. 

4.13.6 No Project Alternative 

Under the No Project Alternative, the FERC would deny North Baja’s application for a 
Certificate and a Presidential Permit amendment, the CSLC would deny North Baja’s application for an 
amendment to its right-of-way lease across California’s Sovereign and School Lands, and the BLM would 
deny North Baja’s application to amend its existing Right-of-Way Grant and obtain a Temporary Use 
Permit for the portion of the Project on Federal lands. The No Project Alternative means that the Project 
would not go forward and the Project-related facilities would not be installed. Accordingly, none of the 
potential environmental impacts identified for the construction and operation of the proposed Project 
would occur. 

Because the proposed Project is privately funded, it is unknown whether North Baja would fund 
another energy project in California. However, should the No Project Alternative be selected, the energy 
needs identified in Section 1.1 would likely be addressed through other means, such as through other 
LNG or natural gas-related pipeline projects. Such projects may result in potential environmental impacts 
of the nature and magnitude of the proposed Project as well as impacts particular to their respective 
configurations and operations; however, these impacts cannot be predicted with any certainty at this time. 


4-213 


4.14 RELIABILITY AND SAFETY 


The transportation of natural gas by pipeline involves some risk to the public in the event of an 
accident and subsequent release of gas. The greatest hazard is a fire or explosion following a major 
pipeline rupture. 

Methane, the primary component of natural gas, is colorless, odorless, and tasteless. It is not 
toxic, but is classified as a simple asphyxiate, possessing a slight inhalation hazard. If breathed in high 
concentration, oxygen deficiency can result in serious injury or death. 

Methane has an ignition temperature of 1,000 °F and is flammable at concentrations between 5 
percent and 15 percent in air. Unconfined mixtures of methane in air are not explosive. However, a 
flammable concentration within an enclosed space in the presence of an ignition source can explode. It is 
buoyant at atmospheric temperatures and disperses rapidly in air. 

4.14.1 Significance Criteria 

An adverse impact on public safety would be considered significant and would require mitigation 
if Project construction or operation would: 

• result in a substantial potential for incidents that would cause serious injury or death to 
members of the public; 

• substantially diminish the level of fire and police services (reduction of acceptable 
response times); 

• impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response 
plan or emergency evacuation plan; or 

• significantly increase fire hazard in areas with flammable materials. 

4.14.2 Safety Standards 

The DOT is mandated to provide pipeline safety under Title 49, USC Chapter 601. The Pipeline 
and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration’s (PHMSA), Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS) administers 
the national regulatory program to ensure the safe transportation of natural gas and other hazardous 
materials by pipeline. It develops safety regulations and other approaches to risk management that ensure 
safety in the design, construction, testing, operation, maintenance, and emergency response of pipeline 
facilities. Many of the regulations are written as performance standards that set the level of safety to be 
attained and allow the pipeline operator to use various technologies to achieve safety. The PHMSA 
ensures that people and the environment are protected from the risk of pipeline incidents. This work is 
shared with State agency partners and others at the Federal, State, and local level. Section 5(a) of the 
Natural Gas Pipeline Safety Act provides for a State agency to assume all aspects of the safety program 
for intrastate facilities by adopting and enforcing the Federal standards, while section 5(b) permits a State 
agency that does not qualify under section 5(a) to perform certain inspection and monitoring functions. A 
State may also act as the DOT’S agent to inspect interstate facilities within its boundaries; however, the 
DOT is responsible for enforcement action. The majority of the States have either section 5(a) 
certifications or section 5(b) agreements, while nine States act as interstate agents. Both Arizona and 
California have section 5(a) certifications. 


4-214 


The DOT pipeline standards are published in Parts 190-199 of Title 49 of the CFR. Part 192 of 
Title 49 CFR specifically addresses natural gas pipeline safety issues. 

Under a Memorandum of Understanding on Natural Gas Transportation Facilities (Memorandum) 
dated January 15, 1993 between the DOT and the FERC, the DOT has the exclusive authority to 
promulgate Federal safety standards used in the transportation of natural gas. Section 157.14(a)(9)(vi) of 
the FERC's regulations require that an Applicant certify that it will design, install, inspect, test, construct, 
operate, replace, and maintain the facility for which a Certificate is requested in accordance with Federal 
safety standards and plans for maintenance and inspection, or shall certify that it has been granted a 
waiver of the requirements of the safety standards by the DOT in accordance with section 3(e) of the 
Natural Gas Pipeline Safety Act. The FERC accepts this certification and does not impose additional 
safety standards other than the DOT standards. If the FERC becomes aware of an existing or potential 
safety problem, there is a provision in the Memorandum to promptly alert the DOT. The Memorandum 
also provides for referring complaints and inquiries made by State and local governments and the general 
public involving safety matters related to pipelines under the FERC’s jurisdiction. 

The FERC also participates as a member of the DOT'S Technical Pipeline Safety Standards 
Committee, which determines if proposed safety regulations are reasonable, feasible, and practicable. 

As part of the leasing process in California, the CSLC reviews pipeline projects to ensure that 
they are designed in compliance with applicable Federal and California standards, and that they reflect 
current geologic and seismic information. The CSLC’s engineering and environmental review assesses 
both siting and safety issues, such as the location of the Project relative to seismic and populated areas, 
and the adequacy of the information contained in the Applicant’s construction, operations, maintenance, 
and emergency response plans (e.g., proposed internal and external maintenance inspection processes, 
integrity testing methods to be applied, corrosion monitoring and testing and calibration of the cathodic 
protection system, leak monitoring, and emergency response plans and procedures). In determining 
whether or not to approve or amend a lease and/or certify the CEQA documentation for a project, the 
CSLC may consider if standards above the DOT minimum standards provided for in Title 49 CFR Part 
192 are warranted in fault zone and populated areas, and may require additional safety measures, such as 
the installation of automatic shutoff valves in these areas. For approved projects, the CSLC staff also 
reviews (for consistency with the CSLC’s action on the lease) post-construction documentation, including 
“as-built” construction plans showing any design changes or other amendments to the project as 
approved, pipeline test results (e.g., smart pig and hydrostatic testing), and details of any extraordinary 
occurrences such as spill incidents and accidents. 

The pipeline and aboveground facilities associated with the North Baja Pipeline Expansion 
Project would be designed, constructed, operated, and maintained in accordance with or to exceed the 
DOT Minimum Federal Safety Standards in Title 49 CFR Part 192 and the California Public Utilities 
Commission, General Order 112-E. These regulations, which are intended to protect the public and to 
prevent natural gas facility accidents and failures, include specifications for material selection and 
qualification; odorization of gas; minimum design requirements; and protection of the pipeline from 
internal, external, and atmospheric corrosion. To address seismic hazards, the facilities would be 
designed to meet or exceed the latest edition of the Uniform Building Code or International Building 
Code and to incorporate current seismological engineering standards, including the Guidelines for the 
Design of Buried Steel Pipe (American Lifelines Alliance 2001) and Guidelines for the Seismic Design 
and Assessment of Natural Gas and Liquid Hydrocarbon Pipelines (Pipeline Research Council 
International, Inc. 2004). In addition, North Baja’s construction contractors would be required to comply 
with the OSHA Safety and Health Regulations for Construction in Title 29 CFR Part 1926. 


4-215 


The standards in the Federal regulations become more stringent as the human population density 
in the vicinity of the pipeline increases. Part 192 also defines area classifications, based on population 
density in the vicinity of the pipeline, and specifies more rigorous safety requirements for populated 
areas. The class location unit is an area that extends 220 yards on either side of the centerline of any 
continuous 1-mile length of pipeline. The four area classifications are as follows: 

• Class 1 - Location with 10 or fewer buildings intended for human occupancy; 

• Class 2 - Location with more than 10 but less than 46 buildings intended for human 
occupancy; 

• Class 3 - Location with 46 or more buildings intended for human occupancy or where the 
pipeline lies within 100 yards of any building, or small well-defined outside area 
occupied by 20 or more people on at least 5 days a week for 10 weeks in any 12-month 
period; and 

• Class 4 - Location where buildings with four or more stories aboveground are prevalent. 

Class locations representing more populated areas require higher safety factors in pipeline design, 
testing, and operation. Pipelines constructed on land in Class 1 locations must be installed with a 
minimum depth of cover of 30 inches in normal soil and 18 inches in consolidated rock. Class 2, 3, and 4 
locations, as well as drainage ditches of public roads and railroad crossings, require a minimum cover of 
36 inches in normal soil and 24 inches in consolidated rock. All pipelines installed in navigable rivers, 
streams, and harbors must have a minimum cover of 48 inches in soil or 24 inches in consolidated rock. 
North Baja would design all railroad crossings in accordance with the AREMA Manual for Railway 
Engineering, Part 5 Pipeline and Title 49 CFR Part 192 Transportation of Natural Gas by Pipeline: 
Minimum Federal Safety Standards. The AREMA specifications require a minimum distance of 10 feet 
from the bottom of the rail to the top of the pipe. All road crossings would be designed to comply with 
Title 49 CFR Part 192 Transportation of Natural Gas by Pipeline: Minimum Federal Safety Standards , 
which specifies a minimum depth of cover of 3 feet in road ditches. In addition, all roadway and highway 
crossings would be designed to meet the applicable State and local agency permit requirements and the 
latest edition of American Petroleum Institute 1102 requirements. 

Pipe wall thickness and pipeline design pressures, MAOP, hydrostatic test pressures, inspection 
and testing of welds, and frequency of pipeline patrols and leak surveys must also conform to higher 
standards in more populated areas. For the B-Line, North Baja proposes to use Class 1 pipe in 
comparable areas of the A-Line: between MPs 11.7 and 79.8. Class 2 pipe would be used between MPs 
0.0 and 11.7 and at all road and railroad crossings within Class 1 locations. For the IID Lateral, Class 2 
pipe would be used between MPs 45.0 and 45.7. Class 3 pipe would be used between MPs 0.0 and 0.25, 
3.1 and 3.7, and 8.5 and 9.1. Class 1 pipe would be used in all other locations. The design pressure and 
MAOP of the pipeline facilities would be 1,150 psig. The normal operating pressure would be 1,050 
psig. Hydrostatic test pressures would be 90 to 100 percent of the specified minimum yield strength of the 
pipe being tested. 

If a subsequent increase in population density adjacent to the right-of-way indicates a change in 
class location for the pipeline, North Baja would be required to reduce the MAOP or replace the segment 
with pipe of sufficient grade and wall thickness to comply with the DOT code of regulations for the new 
class location. 

Class locations also specify the maximum distance to sectionalizing remote manual block valves 
(referred to as valves in other sections of this document). Part 192 regulations require at least one valve 


4-216 


every 20 miles in Class 1 locations, every 15 miles in Class 2 locations, every 8 miles in Class 3 
locations, and every 5 miles in Class 4 locations. The spacing between the valves for the North Baja 
Pipeline Expansion Project would meet or exceed the DOT requirements for the appropriate class 
location. The valves proposed for the B-Line would be adjacent to the existing valves on the A-Line. 

External corrosion control measures include the protective coating on the exterior of the pipe and 
use of cathodic protection systems. These systems are designed to meet requirements established by the 
DOT for protection of metallic facilities from external, internal, and atmospheric corrosion. North Baja 
plans to use an impressed current system using deep well anodes placed in areas where their effect would 
provide the required negative-induced potential to resist external corrosion. The deep well anodes would 
be within the pipeline right-of-way. Aboveground facilities would be painted with a suitable anti¬ 
corrosion coating. Internal corrosion is not expected to be a factor because North Baja would monitor the 
pipeline interior through the use of internal corrosion probes, on-line pigging tools, or a combination of 
the two. 


The aboveground cathodic protection facilities proposed for the Project include electrical 
rectifiers to provide the necessary electrical current and test leads for conducting system voltage tests. 
Rectifiers are generally mounted on power poles inside locked metal electrical boxes, where test leads are 
generally protected from weather in capped plastic risers designed for that purpose. During the scoping 
process, a question was raised whether North Baja plans any specific vandalism protection measures in 
high-use recreational areas. North Baja reports that no acts of vandalism along the existing A-Line have 
occurred to rectifiers and, therefore, it does not plan to implement any extraordinary vandalism protection 
measures on the cathodic protection devices. North Baja states that its biggest concern for possible 
vandalism would be rectifier installations in the ISDRA portion of the IID Lateral route; however, North 
Baja believes that the cathodic protection system can be designed for the pipeline facilities without 
utilizing this area for rectifier installations. 

North Baja would x-ray all girth welds over 6 inches in diameter where possible to ensure 
pipeline structural integrity and compliance with the applicable DOT regulations. Where x-ray inspection 
is impossible or impractical, other means of non-destructive inspection would be conducted. Those welds 
that do not meet established specifications would be repaired or replaced. Once the welds are approved, 
the welded joints would be coated with a protective coating and the entire pipeline would be visually 
inspected for any faults, scratches, or other coating defects. Any damage would be repaired before the 
pipeline is installed. 

After construction, North Baja would clearly mark the pipeline at line-of-sight intervals, roads, 
railroads, and other key points to alert the public to the presence of the pipeline. The markers would 
provide contact information for North Baja in the event of an emergency. In accordance with the DOT 
regulations in effect since 1982, North Baja would participate in all communication and notification 
“One-Call” services to prevent outside damage to the pipeline. These services provide preconstruction 
information to contractors or other maintenance workers on the underground location of pipes, cables, and 
culverts. 

In 2002, Congress passed an act to strengthen the nation’s pipeline safety laws. The Pipeline 
Safety Improvement Act of 2002 (HR 3609) was passed by Congress on November 15, 2002, and signed 
into law by the President in December 2002. By December 17, 2004, gas transmission operators were 
required to develop and follow a written integrity management program that contains all the elements 
described in Part 192.911 and addresses the risks on each covered transmission pipeline segment. 
Specifically, the law establishes an integrity management program that applies to all high consequence 
areas (HCAs). The DOT (68 FR 69778, 69 FR 18228, and 69 FR 29903) defines HCAs as they relate to 


4-217 


the different class zones, potential impact circles, or areas containing an identified site as defined in Part 
192.903 of the DOT regulations. 

The OPS published a series of rules from August 6, 2002 to May 26, 2004 (69 FR 29903), that 
defines HCAs where a gas pipeline accident could do considerable harm to people and their property and 
requires an integrity management program to minimize the potential for an accident. This definition 
satisfies, in part, the Congressional mandate in Title 49, USC 60109 for the OPS to prescribe standards 
that establish criteria for identifying each gas pipeline facility in a high-density population area. 

The HCAs may be defined in one of two ways. In the first method, an HCA includes: 

• current Class 3 and 4 locations; 

• any area in Class 1 or 2 locations where the PIR 6 is greater than 660 feet and there are 20 
or more buildings intended for human occupancy within the potential impact circle; 7 or 

• any area in Class 1 or 2 locations where the potential impact circle includes an identified 
site. 8 

In the second method, an HCA includes any area within a potential impact circle that contains: 

• 20 or more buildings intended for human occupancy; or 

• an identified site. 

Once a pipeline operator has determined the HCAs on its pipeline, it must apply the elements of 
its integrity management program to those segments of the pipeline within HCAs. The DOT regulations 
specify the requirements for the integrity management plan at Part 192.911. The pipeline integrity 
management rule for HCAs requires inspection of the entire pipeline in HCAs every 7 years. 

North Baja would prepare and implement an Operation and Maintenance Plan in accordance with 
the requirements in Title 49 CFR Part 192. The plan would include the following activities: 

• employee qualification to operate and maintain the pipeline system in accordance with 
the Title 49 CFR Part 192 Operator Qualification Rule; 

• air patrols of the pipeline right-of-way to monitor its condition, including any indications 
of third-party encroachment; 

• on-the-ground leak surveys with leak detector equipment; 

• annual contact of property owners, utilities, local government agencies, contractors, and 
other interested parties to inform them of the pipeline location and procedures to be 
followed in reporting and responding to a pipeline emergency; 


6 The potential impact radius is calculated as the product of 0.69 and the square root of the maximum allowable operating pressure of the 
pipeline in pounds per square inch multiplied by the pipeline diameter in inches. 

7 The potential impact circle is a circle of radius equal to the potential impact radius. 

x An identified site is an outside area or open structure that is occupied by 20 or more persons on at least 50 days in any 12-month period; a 
building that is occupied by 20 or more persons on at least 5 days a week for any 10 weeks in any 12-month period; or a facility that is 
occupied by persons who are confined, are of impaired mobility, or would be difficult to evacuate. 


4-218 



• participation in a "One Call” system in each State where the pipeline is located, including 
staking and marking service for third-party construction and landowner requests; 

• internal audits of field locations to ensure compliance with existing operating and 
maintenance standards and safe-work procedures; 

• periodic pipe-to-soil potential surveys and rectifier inspections to maintain the line’s 
cathodic protection; 

• annual in-house training for operation and maintenance personnel to maintain skill levels 
and review safety procedures in case of a pipeline emergency; and 

• annual testing and inspection of pressure-limiting devices and emergency shutdown 
systems at the compressor stations. 

The existing pipeline system is monitored and controlled 24 hours a day for pressure drops in the 
pipeline that could indicate a leak or other operating problem through a SCADA system. A detailed 
description of the SCADA system is included in Section 2.6. In addition, a crew that conducts on-site 
operations and maintenance is at the Ehrenberg Compressor Station, and is on-call 24 hours a day. When 
completed, the B-Line and BEI and IID Laterals would be operated in conjunction with the existing 
system and subject to the same operation and maintenance procedures. 

The pipeline would be designed to be piggable, allowing for the future use of smart pigs for 
internal integrity inspection. In addition, North Baja would run a gauging plate and, if warranted, a 
caliper tool to determine if there are any dents in the pipeline as a result of construction. Dents that 
exceed those allowable by code would be removed before placing the pipeline into service. 

Within the first 6 months of placing the pipeline into operation, North Baja would conduct an 
internal inspection of the pipeline. This inspection would use an in-line magnetic flux leakage inspection 
tool (i.e., smart pig). The record of this inspection would serve as an initial set of data that would be 
compared to future internal inspections so that changes in pipe condition, primarily pipe wall thickness 
loss, can be readily determined and corrected. The initial test would likely not indicate any anomalies 
that would require correction because the pipeline would be new and would have completed a successful 
hydrostatic test. Following the initial test, internal inspections with a high resolution instrument would be 
conducted on a periodic basis, at a minimum of one inspection every 10 years, or sooner if the evidence 
suggests that significant corrosion or defects exist or if any new Federal or State regulations require more 
frequent or comparable inspections. 

The pipeline system would be inspected by air and on the ground to observe right-of-way 
conditions and identify indications of leaks, evidence of pipeline damage, evidence of encroachment (i.e., 
landowners building permanent structures on the permanent right-of-way), or damage to erosion controls 
resulting from erosion or washouts. North Baja proposes to construct an odorant facility at the Ogilby 
Meter Station that would odorize the gas using mercaptan, a chemical that would be injected into the 
natural gas stream in small amounts to give it a distinctive odor. Mercaptan, similar to natural gas, is 
non-toxic and is added to the gas stream for the sole purpose of leak detection. Additional discussion of 
the odorant facility is included in Section 4.12.4. North Baja would comply with other DOT surveillance, 
leak detection requirements such as leakage surveys, aerial surveys, and pedestrian surveys of its 
facilities. 

In accordance with Part 192.615, North Baja would develop an Emergency Response Plan 
comparable to that developed for the A-Line that includes procedures to respond to and minimize the 


4-219 


hazards from a natural gas pipeline emergency along its system. The Emergency Response Plan would 
include the following: 

• local field headquarters to contact; 

• listing of company personnel, local police, and fire authorities to contact; 

• listing of equipment available at field locations; 

• description of the roles of field supervisors, gas control operators, field crews, and 
support personnel during an emergency; 

• description of procedures for maintaining communication between gas control operators 
and local fire, police, and government authorities; 

• description of procedures for securing additional help from non-company 
resources; and 

• requirements for logging emergency events and reporting the emergency to company and 
regulatory authorities. 

Key elements of the plan also include procedures for: 

• receiving, identifying, and classifying emergency events, gas leakage, fires, explosions, 
and natural disasters; 

• establishing and maintaining communications with local fire, police, and public officials, 
and coordinating emergency response; 

• making personnel, equipment, tools, and materials available at the scene of an 
emergency; 

• protecting people first and then property, and making them safe from actual or potential 
hazards; and 

• emergency shutdown of the system and safe restoration of service. 

In the unlikely event of a pipeline rupture caused by a seismic event (or any other cause), North 
Baja would implement its emergency response procedures. All North Baja facilities would be designed 
with remote manual pipeline block valves with automatic shutdown capability that are programmed to 
sense pipeline ruptures and to isolate a specific pipeline valve section in the case of a catastrophic rupture 
in that valve section. Like the existing North Baja system, a precipitous pressure drop would trigger an 
alarm at North Baja’s Gas Control Center, which is staffed 24 hours a day. The operator would have 10 
minutes in which to determine whether the pressure drop is caused by something other than a rupture and 
either override the alarm or initiate a shutdown. If neither of these actions is taken by the operator within 
10 minutes, or if line pressure decreases to a pre-determined threshold before 10 minutes, the valve would 
close automatically. 

North Baja currently has procedures in place in the event of an emergency to utilize the Spokane, 
Washington operations center as an emergency call center. This call center is in the process of being 
changed to Redmond, Oregon. By the time the proposed Project would be in operation, the Redmond 


4-220 


center would likely be operational. There would also be a corporate call center in Calgary, Alberta, 
Canada. The purpose of the call centers in the first few minutes following a rupture is to mobilize 
company resources to secure the incident site and notify local first responders of the incident. The 
incident site is surrendered to local first responders upon their arrival. Procedures are also in place to 
notify Sempra of any incident occurring on the North Baja facilities so that it can respond appropriately 
with regard to its facilities and jurisdictions in Mexico. North Baja’s valves and emergency response 
procedures would reduce the potential for significant fire hazard in areas with flammable materials. 

4.14.3 Pipeline Accident Data 

If a pipeline rupture were to occur after pipeline operation has begun, natural gas would percolate 
through the soil and rapidly dissipate into the atmosphere. The potential outcome would depend on the 
volume of natural gas released and whether an ignition source is available. A pipeline break could result 
in soil and debris being thrown from the area of the break, destruction of nearby vegetation, and, in the 
case of ignition, explosion or fire causing injury or property damage. 

Since February 9, 1970, Title 49 CFR Part 191 has required all operators of transmission and 
gathering systems to notify the DOT of any reportable incident and to submit a report on form F7100.2 
within 20 days. Reportable incidents are defined as any leaks that: 

• caused a death or personal injury requiring hospitalization; 

• required taking any segment of transmission line out of service; 

• resulted in gas ignition; 

• caused estimated damage to the property of the operator, or others, or both, of a total of 
$5,000 or more; 

• required immediate repair on a transmission line; 

• occurred while testing with gas or another medium; or 

• in the judgment of the operator was significant, even though it did not meet the above 
criteria. 

The DOT changed reporting requirements after June 1984 to reduce the amount of data collected. 
Since that date, operators must only report incidents that involve property damage of more than $50,000, 
injury, death, release of gas, or that are otherwise considered significant by the operator. Table 4.14.3-1 
presents a summary of incident data for the 1970 to 1984 period, as well as more recent incident data for 
1986 through 2005, recognizing the difference in reporting requirements. The 14.5-year period from 
1970 through June 1984, which provides a larger universe of data and more basic report information than 
subsequent years, has been subject to detailed analysis, as discussed in the following sections. 9 


American Gas Association 1986. "An Analysis of Reportable Incidents for Natural Gas Transportation and Gathering Lines 1970 Through 
June 1984." NG-18 Report No. 158, Pipeline Research Committee of the American Gas Association. D.J. Jones. G.S. Kramer, D.N. Gideon, 
and R.J. Eiber. 


4-221 



TABLE 4.14.3-1 

Natural Gas Service Incidents by Cause 


Incidents per 1,000 miles of pipeline (percentage) 

Cause 

1970-1984 

1986-2005 

Outside force 

0.70 (53.8) 

0.10 (38.5) 

Corrosion 

0.22 (16.9) 

0.06 (23.1) 

Construction or material defect 

0.27 (20.8) 

0.04 (15.4) 

Other 

0.11 (8.5) 

0.06 (23.1) 

Total 

1.30 

0.26 


During the 14.5-year period, 5,862 service incidents were reported over the more than 300,000 
total miles of natural gas transmission and gathering systems nationwide. Service incidents, defined as 
failures that occur during pipeline operation, have remained fairly constant over this period with no clear 
upward or downward trend in annual totals. In addition, 2,013 test failures were reported. Correction of 
test failures removed defects from the pipeline before operation. 

Additional insight into the nature of service incidents may be found by examining the primary 
factors that caused the failures. Table 4.14.3-1 provides a percentage distribution of the causal factors as 
well as the annual frequency of each factor per 1,000 miles of pipeline in service. 

The dominant incident cause is outside forces, constituting 53.8 percent of all service incidents 
between 1970 and 1984 and 38.5 percent between 1986 and 2005. Outside forces incidents result from 
the encroachment of mechanical equipment such as bulldozers and backhoes; earth movements due to soil 
settlement, washouts, or geologic hazards; weather effects such as winds, storms, and thermal strains; and 
willful damage. Table 4.14.3-2 shows that, of the service incidents caused by outside forces, human error 
in equipment usage was responsible for approximately 75 percent of the incidents. Since April 1982, 
operators have been required to participate in “One-Call” public utility programs in populated areas to 
minimize unauthorized excavation activities in the vicinity of pipelines. The 1986 through 2005 data 
show that the portion of incidents caused by outside forces has decreased to 38.5 percent (see Table 
4.14.3-1). 


TABLE 4.14.3-2 

Outside Forces Incidents by Cause (1970-1984) 

Cause 


Percent 

Equipment operated by outside party 


67.1 

Equipment operated by or for operator 


7.3 

Earth movement 


13.3 

Weather 


10.8 

Other 


1.5 


The pipelines included in the data set in Table 4.14.3-1 vary widely in terms of age, pipe 
diameter, and level of corrosion control. Each variable influences the incident frequency that may be 
expected for a specific segment of pipeline. 

The frequency of service incidents is strongly dependent on pipeline age. While pipelines 
installed since 1950 exhibit a fairly constant level of service incident frequency, pipelines installed before 
that time have a significantly higher rate, partially due to corrosion. Older pipelines have a higher 
frequency of corrosion incidents, because corrosion is a time-dependent process. Further, new pipe 
generally uses more advanced coatings and cathodic protection to reduce corrosion potential. 


4-222 









Older pipelines have a higher frequency of outside forces incidents partly because their location 
may be less well known and less well marked than newer lines. In addition, smaller diameter pipelines 
constitute a disproportionate number of the older pipelines, which have a greater rate of outside forces 
incidents. Small diameter pipelines are more easily crushed or broken by mechanical equipment or earth 
movements. 

Table 4.14.3-3 clearly demonstrates the effectiveness of corrosion control in reducing the 
incidence of failures caused by external corrosion. The use of both an external protective coating and a 
cathodic protection system, required on all pipelines installed after July 1971, significantly reduces the 
rate of failure compared to unprotected or partially protected pipe. The data show that bare, cathodically 
protected pipe actually has a higher corrosion rate than unprotected pipe. This anomaly reflects the 
retrofitting of cathodic protection to actively corroding spots on pipes. 


TABLE 4.14.3-3 

External Corrosion by Level of Control (1970-1984) 

Corrosion Control 


Incidents per 1,000 miles per year 

None-bare pipe 


0.42 

Cathodic protection only 


0.97 

Coated only 


0.40 

Coated and cathodic protection 


0.11 


4.14.4 Impact on Public Safety 

The service incident data summarized in Table 4.14.3-1 include pipeline failures of all 
magnitudes with widely varying consequences. Approximately two-thirds of the incidents were classified 
as leaks, and the remaining third classified as ruptures, implying a more serious failure. 

Table 4.14.4-1 presents the average annual fatalities that occurred on natural gas transmission and 
gathering lines from 1970 to 2005. Fatalities between 1970 and June 1984 have been separated into 
employees and nonemployees, to better identify a fatality rate experienced by the general public. Of the 
total 5.0 nationwide average, fatalities among the public averaged 2.6 per year over this period. The 
simplified reporting requirements in effect after June 1984 do not differentiate between employees and 
nonemployees. However, the data show that the total annual average for the period 1984 through 2005 
decreased to 3.6 fatalities per year. Subtracting two major offshore incidents in 1989, which do not 
reflect the risk to the onshore public, yields a total annual rate of 2.8 fatalities per year for this period. 


TABLE 4.14.4-1 


Annual Average Fatalities - Natural Gas Transmission and Gathering Systems a b 

Year 

Employees 

Nonemployees 

Total 

1970-June 1984 

2.4 

2.6 

5.0 

1984-2005° 

- 

- 

3.6 

1984-2005° 

- 

- 

2.8 d 


1970 through June 1984 - American Gas Association 1986. 

DOT Hazardous Materials Information System. 

Employee/nonemployee breakdown not available after June 1984. 

Without 18 offshore fatalities that occurred in 1989 (11 fatalities resulted from a fishing vessel striking an offshore pipeline 
and 7 fatalities resulted from an explosion on an offshore production platform)._ 


4-223 










The nationwide totals of accidental fatalities from various manmade and natural hazards are listed 
in Table 4.14.4-2 in order to provide a relative measure of the industry-wide safety of natural gas 
pipelines. Direct comparisons between accident categories should be made cautiously, however, because 
individual exposures to hazards are not uniform among all categories. Nevertheless, the average 2.6 
public fatalities per year is relatively small considering the more than 300,000 miles of transmission and 
gathering lines in service nationwide. Furthermore, the fatality rate is approximately two orders of 
magnitude (100 times) lower than the fatalities from natural hazards such as lightning, tornados, floods, 
earthquakes, etc. 


TABLE 4.14.4-2 

Nationwide Accidental Deaths a 


Type of Accident 

Fatalities 

All accidents 

90,523 

Motor vehicles 

43,649 

Falls 

14,985 

Drowning 

3,488 

Poisoning 

9,510 

Fires and burns 

3,791 

Suffocation by ingested object 

3,206 

Tornado, flood, earthquake, etc. (1984 to 1993 average) 

181 

All liquid and gas pipelines (1978 to 1987 average) b 

27 

Gas transmission and gathering lines 

2.6 

Nonemployees only (1970 to 1984 average) c 

All data, unless otherwise noted, reflect 1996 statistics from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 

“Statistical Abstract of the United States 118th Edition.” 

b U.S. Department of Transportation “Annual Report on Pipeline Safety - Calendar Year 1987.” 

American Gas Association 1986. 


The available data show that natural gas pipelines continue to be a safe, reliable means of energy 
transportation. Based on approximately 301,000 miles in service, the rate of public fatalities for the 
nationwide mix of transmission and gathering lines in service is 0.01 per year per 1,000 miles of pipeline. 
Using this rate, the pipeline facilities associated with the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project might 
result in a public fatality about every 793 years. This would represent a slight increase in risk to the 
nearby public and would not result in a substantial potential for incidents that would cause serious injury 
or death to members of the public. 

As discussed in Section 4.14.2, North Baja would be required to develop an integrity 
management program that applies to all HCAs. There are no indicated HCAs for North Baja’s existing 
A-Line, but preliminary data indicate that it is likely that two locations along the proposed B-Line might 
qualify as HCAs. These locations are near MPs 27.0 and 75.0. There are no locations along the BEI 
Lateral that would classify as an HCA. Along the IID Lateral, the ISDRA portion of the route (MPs 0.0 
to 7.0) would classify as a HCA and the newly constructed RV park near MP 9.0 might classify as a HCA 
using Method 1 of the HCA determination protocols. The HCAs potentially crossed by the proposed 
Project are listed by milepost and pipeline class in Table 4.14.4-3. As required by the DOT, North Baja 
would conduct a comprehensive HCA assessment of the new pipeline segments following construction. 
The existing North Baja pipeline facilities are presently managed under an Integrity Management 
Program plan that ensures compliance with Title 49 CFR Part 192, Subpart O. The newly constructed 
facilities would be incorporated into the existing plan. Pipeline inspection within identified HCAs would 
be conducted every 7 years in accordance with the pipeline integrity management rule for HCAs. 
Additional discussion of potential impact radii as they relate to minority and low-income populations is 
provided in Section 4.17.4. 


4-224 






TABLE 4.14.4-3 


Preliminary Identification of High Consequence Areas (HCAs) Crossed by the 

North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 


Facility/Milepost Range per Pipeline Class Pipeline Class HCA Milepost 

Method Used to Determine HCA a 


B-Line 


h-. 

T— 

| 

O 

o 

Class 2 

None 


11.7-79.8 

Class 1 

27.0, 75.0 

1 

BEI Lateral 

0.0-0.6 

Class 2 

None 


IID Lateral 

0.0-0.25 

Class 3 

0.0-0.25 

1 

0.25-3.1 

Class 1 

0.25-3.1 

1 

3.1-3.7 

Class 3 

3.1-3.7 

1 

3.7-8.5 

Class 1 

3.7-7.0 

1 

8.5-9.1 

Class 3 

9.0 

1 

9.1-45.0 

Class 1 

None 


45.0-45.7 

Class 2 

None 



HCA Determination Methods: 

1 = current Class 3 and 4 locations or any area in Class 1 or 2 locations where the potential impact radius is greater 
than 660 feet and there are 20 or more buildings intended for human occupancy within the potential impact circle; or 
any area in Class 1 or 2 locations where the potential impact circle includes an identified site. 

2 = an HCA includes any area within a potential impact circle that contains 20 or more buildings intended for human 
occupancy or an identified site. 


Part 192 requires that each operator must establish and maintain liaison with appropriate fire, 
police, and public officials to learn the resources and responsibilities of each organization that may 
respond to a natural gas pipeline emergency, and to coordinate mutual assistance. The operator must also 
establish a continuing education program to enable customers, the public, government officials, and those 
engaged in excavation activities to recognize a gas pipeline emergency and report it to appropriate public 
officials. Local police and fire departments would be informed of North Baja’s Operation and 
Maintenance and Emergency and Response Plans. Annual meetings would be held with local police and 
fire authorities to review the plans and discuss procedures to follow in case of an emergency. Police and 
fire departments would also receive emergency telephone numbers where they can contact North Baja 24 
hours a day. North Baja would provide the appropriate training to local emergency service personnel 
before the pipeline is placed in service. No additional specialized local fire protection equipment would 
be required to handle pipeline emergencies. As a result of North Baja’s coordination with local 
emergency providers, the level of fire and police services would not be substantially diminished. In 
addition, North Baja’s coordination with local emergency providers would reduce the potential to impair 
implementation of or interference with any local adopted emergency response or evacuation plans. 

4.14.5 Terrorism 

In the aftermath of the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, terrorism has 
become a very real issue for the facilities under the FERC’s jurisdiction. The FERC, like other Federal 
agencies, is faced with a dilemma in how much information can be offered to the public while still 
providing a significant level of protection to energy facilities. Consequently, the FERC has removed 


4-225 










energy facility design plans and location information from its Internet website to ensure that sensitive 
information is not readily available (RM02-4-000 and PL02-1-000 issued February 20, 2003). 

Since September 11, 2001, the FERC has been involved with other Federal agencies in 
developing a coordinated approach to protecting the energy facilities of the United States, and continues 
to coordinate with these agencies to address this issue. In addition, interstate natural gas companies are 
actively involved with several industry groups to chart how best to address security measures in the 
current environment. A Security Task Force has been created and is addressing ways to improve pipeline 
security practices, strengthen communication within the industry and the interface with government, and 
extend public outreach efforts. 

Increased security awareness has occurred throughout the industry and the nation. The Office of 
Homeland Security was established with the mission of coordinating the efforts of all executive 
departments and agencies to detect, prepare for, prevent, protect against, respond to, and recover from 
terrorist attacks within the United States. The FERC, in cooperation with other Federal agencies and 
industry trade groups, has joined in the efforts to protect the energy infrastructure, including the 
approximately 300,000 miles of interstate natural gas transmission pipelines. The pipeline system would 
be inspected by air and on the ground in accordance with DOT surveillance requirements as discussed in 
Section 14.4.2. Security measures at the aboveground facilities would include secure fencing, locked 
buildings, security lighting, and automated alarm systems. Employees would be required to wear 
identification cards, and approved visitors would need to sign in and wear identification badges. 

Safety and security are important considerations in any action undertaken by the FERC and the 
CSLC. The attacks of September 11, 2001 have changed the way pipeline operators as well as regulators 
must consider terrorism, both in approving new projects and in operating existing facilities. However, the 
likelihood of future attacks of terrorism or sabotage occurring along the proposed Project, or at any of the 
myriad of natural gas pipeline or energy facilities throughout the United States is unpredictable given the 
disparate motives and abilities of terrorist groups. The continuing need to construct facilities to support 
the future natural gas pipeline infrastructure is not diminished from the threat of any such future acts. 
Moreover, the unpredictable possibility of such acts does not support a finding that this particular Project 
should not be constructed. 

4.14.6 Arrowhead Alternative 

If the Arrowhead Alternative were constructed, it would result in 1.5 additional miles of pipeline 
than the corresponding facilities. These facilities would be located 200 feet further from the nearest 
residence than the corresponding facilities, and no businesses would be within 100 feet of the pipeline. 
Operation of the Arrowhead Alternative would not substantially alter the potential effects of the North 
Baja Pipeline Expansion Project on public safety. 

4.14.7 No Project Alternative 

Under the No Project Alternative, the FERC would deny North Baja’s application for a 
Certificate and a Presidential Permit amendment, the CSLC would deny North Baja’s application for an 
amendment to its right-of-way lease across California’s Sovereign and School Lands, and the BLM would 
deny North Baja’s application to amend its existing Right-of-Way Grant and obtain a Temporary Use 
Permit for the portion of the Project on Federal lands. The No Project Alternative means that the Project 
would not go forward and the Project-related facilities would not be installed. Accordingly, none of the 
potential environmental impacts identified for the construction and operation of the proposed Project 
would occur. 


4-226 


Because the proposed Project is privately funded, it is unknown whether North Baja would fund 
another energy project in California. However, should the No Project Alternative be selected, the energy 
needs identified in Section 1.1 would likely be addressed through other means, such as through other 
LNG or natural gas-related pipeline projects. Such projects may result in potential environmental impacts 
of the nature and magnitude of the proposed Project as well as impacts particular to their respective 
configurations and operations; however, these impacts cannot be predicted with any certainty at this time. 


4-227 


4.15 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS 


Cumulative impacts may result when the environmental effects associated with a proposed 
project are superimposed on, or added to, either temporary (construction related) or permanent (operation 
related) impacts associated with past, present, or reasonably foreseeable future projects. Although the 
individual impact of each separate project may be minor, the additive or synergistic effects of multiple 
projects could be significant. 

Existing environmental conditions in the Project area reflect changes based on past projects and 
activities. Much of the Project area is rural and relatively undeveloped. However, significant changes to 
portions of the Project area have resulted from activities related to agriculture, mining, water diversion, 
transportation projects, recreation, exotic species introductions, and residential/commercial development. 

Table 4.15-1 lists present or reasonably foreseeable future projects or activities that may 
cumulatively or additively impact resources that would be affected by construction and operation of the 
North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project. Construction schedules of the future projects depend on factors 
such as economics, funding, and regulatory considerations. Projects and activities included in this 
analysis are generally those of comparable magnitude and nature of impact, and are located within the 
same counties that would be affected by the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project. With some 
exceptions, more geographically distant projects are not assessed because their impact would generally be 
localized and, therefore, would not contribute significantly to cumulative impacts in the proposed Project 
area. 

4.15.1 Geology and Soils 

The facilities associated with the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project are expected to have a 
temporary but direct impact on near-surface geology and soils. Impacts on geology and soils could lead 
to poor revegetation potential and indirectly affect wildlife and aquatic resources as a result of poor 
vegetative cover and increased erosion and sedimentation. The soil stabilization and revegetation 
requirements included in North Baja’s CM&R Plan would prevent or minimize any indirect impacts. 
Because the direct effects would be highly localized and limited primarily to the period of construction, 
cumulative impacts on geology and soils would only occur if other projects are constructed at the same 
time and place as the proposed facilities. The construction of several of the projects listed in Table 4.15-1 
would coincide with the schedule proposed for the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project. Projects that 
require significant excavation or grading such as the Drop 2 Reservoir Project, the landfill and mine 
expansions, and residential developments would also have temporary direct impacts on near-surface 
geology and soils. The additive impact of the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project on most of these 
projects would be minimal because they would not occur within the same local vicinity. The Drop 2 
Reservoir Project, however, would be relatively close to the IID Lateral. While there would be the 
potential for cumulative impacts on geological resources and soils if the project was constructed 
concurrently with the IID Lateral, any cumulative impact on geology and soils would be minimized by 
the implementation of erosion control and restoration measures during the construction and restoration of 
the projects. Consequently, any potential cumulative impacts on geological resources and soils would be 
temporary and minor. 


4-228 


TABLE 4.15-1 


Existing or Proposed Activities Cumulatively Affecting Resources of Concern 
for the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 


Activity/Project 

County 

Description 

Approximate 
Acres of 

Land 

Affected 

Anticipated 

Construction 

Dates 

Blythe Energy Project Phase II 

Riverside 

Expansion of electrical generation 
facilities 

66.0 

Unknown 

Blythe Energy Project 
Transmission Line Modification 

Riverside 

Installation of 74.1 miles of 230-kilovolt 
transmission lines 

174.0 

2007 

Palo Verde-Devers 

Transmission Line 

Riverside 

Installation of 230 miles of 500-kilovolt 
transmission lines 

4,015.0 

2009 

Edgewater Lane 

Riverside 

Residential development including 46 
single-family homes 

Unknown 

2007 

All-American Canal Lining 

Project 

Imperial 

Install concrete canal lining 

2,161.0 

2006-2007 

Unit 3 Repower 

Imperial 

Expansion of electrical generation 
facilities 

4.0 

2009 

Department of Homeland 
Security, INS Border Fence 

Imperial 

Construction of a fence along the Mexican 
border 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Drop 2 Reservoir Project 

Imperial 

Construction of a reservoir and canal 

916.0 

2007-2008 

BLM ISDRA - expansion 
Buttercup Valley Recreation 

Area 

Imperial 

Establish a ranger station and 
improvements to campground 

Unknown 

2007 

BLM ISDRA Area Closure 
maintenance 

Imperial 

Closures of recreational areas 

Unknown 

Annual 

Mesquite Regional Landfill 

Imperial 

Construction of regional landfill 

4,000.0 

2007-2008 

Imperial Project 

Imperial 

Open pit gold mine development 

1,302.0 

Unknown 

Mesquite Mine Expansion 

Imperial 

Expansion of gold mining operations 

142.0 

2006 

Felicity Development 

Imperial 

Residential development 

2,345.0 

Unknown 

Las Ventanas 

Imperial 

Residential/commercial development 
including 1,040 single-family homes 

304.0 

Unknown 

Esmeralda Estates 

Imperial 

Residential development including 293 
single-family homes 

80.0 

2008 

Rancho Diamante 

Imperial 

Residential/commercial development 
including 2,257 single-family homes and 

1,944 multi-family units 

1,350.0 

2008 

Los Lagos 

Imperial 

Residential/commercial development 
including 1,132 single-family homes 

500.0 

2008 

Estrella Subdivision 

Imperial 

Residential development including 371 
single-family homes and 400 multi-family 
units 

150.0 

2008 

Gasoducto Expansion Project 
(Phase 1) a 

Mexico 

Installation of compression and 
reconfiguration of an existing pipeline. 

Unknown 

2007 

Gasoducto Bajanorte 

Expansion Project (Phase II) a 

Mexico 

Installation of compression and 
construction of a 140-mile-long pipeline 
loop 

Unknown 

2009 


The Gasoducto Bajanorte Expansion Project would not be located within the same counties as the North Baja 
Pipeline Expansion Project; however, cumulative impacts could result if this project were to be constructed at the 
same time as North Baja’s proposed Project, specifically cumulative impacts on air quality. 


4-229 





4.15.2 Waterbodies and Wetlands 


The North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project would require the crossing of 2 perennial 
waterbodies, 70 irrigation canals and drains, and 265 dry washes. The proposed Project would not 
involve in-stream activities or the construction of permanent diversions or dams and, therefore, is 
expected to have only temporary impacts, if any, on surface water quality. With the exception of the 
Rannells Drain, all flowing waterbodies would either be crossed via an HDD, a bore, or would be avoided 
by crossing culverted portions of the waterbodies; therefore, the potential for the North Baja Pipeline 
Expansion Project to cumulatively affect surface waters within the region is low. The greatest potential 
for impacts on waterbodies that would be crossed by the proposed Project is if a frac-out were to occur 
during one of the proposed HDD crossings. Runoff from construction activities near waterbodies could 
also result in cumulative impacts, although this effect would be relatively minor and would be controlled 
by implementation of erosion and sediment control measures and by compliance with Federal, State, and 
local requirements. Additionally, indirect economic impacts on individuals and/or communities could 
result if surface waters were to become contaminated and/or limitations were placed on the beneficial 
uses (e.g., potable water supply, recreation, and fishing) of the affected waters. However, the potential 
for contamination during the construction of the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project would be minor 
due to the low frequency and volumes of these occurrences and would be further minimized by 
implementation of North Baja’s SPCC Plan. 

Several of the projects listed in Table 4.15-1 are located within the watersheds crossed by the 
North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project, and some of these projects (e.g., Edgewater residential 
development, the All-American Canal Lining Project, and the Drop 2 Reservoir Project) could potentially 
result in impacts on surface waters; however, water quality impacts resulting from construction of the 
proposed Project, if any, would be temporary. The potential for a frac-out at the proposed waterbody 
crossings would be low according to North Baja’s geotechnical studies and, with the exception of the 
Rannells Drain crossing, streambank disturbance would be avoided. Additionally, the potential for 
erosion and sedimentation resulting from the disturbance of areas adjacent to waterbodies in the Project 
area is low given the typically flat topography and arid climate of the Project area. 

Although there is the potential that cumulative impacts could result if the North Baja Pipeline 
Expansion Project were constructed in addition to other projects listed in Table 4.15-1, the geographic 
extent and duration of disturbances caused by construction of the Project would be minimal and further 
minimized by the implementation of North Baja’s Project-specific CM&R and SPCC Plans. Therefore, 
the collective effects of these projects on surface water resources are expected to be minor. 

Impacts on wetlands would result from construction of the proposed Project and some of the 
other reasonably foreseeable future projects. Specifically, the All-American Canal Lining Project would 
impact wetlands by reducing or eliminating the water source for wetlands that depend on seepage from 
the currently unlined portions of the canal. In contrast, the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project would 
not result in the permanent loss or alteration of wetlands. Wetlands affected by the proposed Project 
would be restored following construction, and based on the mitigation monitoring reports completed for 
the A-Line, the primarily tamarisk-dominated wetlands affected would revegetate within 2 to 3 years. 
Therefore, construction and operation of the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project would not contribute 
to cumulative long-term impacts on wetlands within the region. 

4.15.3 Vegetation, Wildlife and Habitat, and Aquatic Resources 

When projects are constructed at the same time or close to the same time, they could have a 
cumulative impact on vegetation and wildlife occurring in the area. Right-of-way clearing and grading 
and other construction activities associated with the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project along with 


4-230 


other construction projects, including the All-American Canal Lining Project, the Gasoducto Bajanorte 
Expansion Project, the Edgewater Lane residential development, and the mining and landfill expansion 
projects would result in the removal of vegetation; alteration of wildlife habitat; displacement of wildlife; 
and other secondary effects such as increased population stress, predation, and the potential establishment 
of invasive plant species. These effects would be greatest where the other projects are constructed within 
the same time frame and area as the proposed Project and where the recovery time of the 
vegetation/habitat is equal to that of the Project (i.e., long term). Because of the long-term impacts that 
would occur as a result of clearing desert vegetation, the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project, if 
constructed along with the other projects listed in Table 4.15-1, would result in cumulative impacts on 
vegetation and wildlife habitats. North Baja’s proposal to overlap its right-of-way onto the previously 
disturbed construction right-of-way, which is subject to restoration requirements, limit new clearing in 
desert wash woodlands, and construct within the road shoulder along portions of the B-Line and IID 
Lateral would minimize the areas of previously undisturbed vegetation that would be affected and thereby 
not contribute to additional cumulative impacts on vegetation and wildlife habitats. Implementation of 
North Baja’s CM&R Plan would promote revegetation of the right-of-way following construction. 
Disturbance in areas of desert wash woodland and areas designated as desert tortoise habitat would 
require compensatory mitigation in addition to restoration of the right-of-way. Additionally, because the 
amount of vegetation/habitat affected would be small compared to that which is regionally available, and 
the entire right-of-way would be allowed to return to preconstruction conditions, any cumulative impact 
may be long term but would be less than significant. 

The projects listed in Table 4.15-1 that are linear in nature have the greatest potential to fragment 
wildlife habitat; however, this effect would be minimal because most of these projects (e.g., the All- 
American Canal Lining project, and the Gasoducto Bajanorte Expansion Project) would be adjacent to 
existing linear facilities and would only incrementally widen existing corridors. Similarly, many of the 
non-linear projects (i.e., the Drop 2 Reservoir Project and the mine and landfill expansions), would occur 
within or adjacent to previously disturbed locations and only incrementally increase the extent of 
disturbance. Potential habitat fragmentation resulting from the proposed Project would be minimal 
because the areas would be allowed to return to pre-existing conditions although, in the case of desert 
habitats, this would occur over the long term. All of the projects would implement mitigation measures 
designed to minimize the potential for long-term erosion, increase the stability of site conditions, and in 
many cases control the spread of noxious weeds, thereby minimizing the degree and duration of the 
cumulative impacts of these projects. 

Construction of the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project at the same time as other projects 
listed in Table 4.15-1 that would affect waterbodies could cause cumulative impacts on aquatic resources 
within the Project area. The crossing of the Colorado River has the greatest potential to affect aquatic 
resources because it is the only waterbody with a designated fishery that would be affected by the Project. 
Because the river would be crossed using the HDD method, impacts are not expected to occur. As 
previously noted, the potential for a frac-out at the Colorado River crossing location would be low and 
impacts resulting from a frac-out, should one occur, would be minimized by the implementation of North 
Baja’s HDD Plan. The duration of any disturbances caused by construction of the North Baja Pipeline 
Expansion Project would be minimal and further minimized by the implementation North Baja’s CM&R, 
SPCC, and HDD Plans in addition to any conditions required by the COE and CDFG as part of their 
respective permit approvals. Additionally, none of the projects listed in Table 4.15-1 would involve 
direct in-stream impacts on the Colorado River. 

Animal and plant species that are federally and/or State-listed threatened and endangered species 
and their critical habitat would be affected by the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project. Cumulative 
impacts on these species could result if other foreseeable future projects would also affect the same 
species or their habitats. However, conservation measures would likely be required for each of these 


4-231 


projects by the jurisdictional agencies to minimize potential impacts on federally and State-listed species. 
Additionally, conservation measures may be recommended for candidate species and species of concern. 
Conservation measures would be project-specific and would be expected to reduce impacts such that the 
projects would not adversely affect the majority of special status species or would not jeopardize the 
continued existence of a species or cause the adverse modification of critical habitat. However, the 
Agency Staffs have determined that two species, the desert tortoise and Peirson’s milk-vetch, as well as 
critical habitat for the desert tortoise, would be likely adversely affected by the Project (see Section 4.7) 
and would result in cumulative impacts on a special status species if other projects listed in Table 4.15-1 
would also occur within desert habitats that support these species. 

4.15.4 Land Use, Special Management Areas, Recreation and Public Interest Areas, and Aesthetic 

Resources 

The proposed Project and several other foreseeable future projects would result in both temporary 
and permanent changes to current land uses. Much of the land that would be disturbed by construction is 
open land. The pipeline facilities associated with the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project would 
temporarily disturb about 1,745.5 acres of land of which 70 percent would be open land, 25 percent would 
be developed land, and 5 percent would be agricultural land. The All-American Lining Project, Drop 2 
Reservoir Project, and mining and landfdl expansion projects listed in Table 4.15-1 would disturb 
hundreds of additional acres of land affecting a variety of land uses. The residential development projects 
proposed for Imperial County would primarily affect farmlands. While most of these projects would have 
permanent impacts on land uses, the majority of land use impacts associated with the North Baja Pipeline 
Expansion Project would be temporary, as most land uses would be allowed to revert to prior uses 
following construction. Permanent impacts on land use would be small because 94 percent of the land 
affected by construction of the pipeline facilities would be allowed to revert to prior uses following 
construction with no restrictions and only 5.4 acres of additional land would be required for the operation 
of aboveground facilities. 

The proposed Project, if built at the same time as other foreseeable future projects, could result in 
cumulative impacts on recreational and public interest areas if these projects would affect the same area 
or feature (e.g., trails) at the same time. The proposed pipeline facilities would cross 11 recreation or 
public interest areas and would be adjacent to several others. However, because the North Baja Pipeline 
Expansion Project would be constructed primarily within or adjacent to existing rights-of-way and would 
not substantially affect the current land uses, most Project-related impacts would be short term, often 
lasting only for the duration of construction through that area, after which the area would be restored to its 
preconstruction condition. 

The visual character of the existing landscape is defined by historic and current land uses such as 
agricultural, recreation, conservation, and development. The visual qualities of the landscape are further 
influenced by existing linear installations such as highways, railroads, pipelines, and electrical 
transmission and distribution lines. Within this context, the proposed meter stations, valves, and other 
aboveground facilities would have the most visual impact, while the pipeline portion of the proposed 
Project would be visually subordinate to the existing landscape character and would contribute only 
incrementally to overall visual conditions, particularly after completion of reclamation and the re¬ 
establishment of vegetation. However, the majority of the Project would affect desert vegetation where 
the impact would be greater because it would take many years to regenerate. Of the projects listed in 
Table 4.15-1, the electrical generation facility, mines and landfill expansions, and the residential 
subdivisions would have the most impact on visual resources in the area. Because 99 percent of the 
proposed Project would be located within or adjacent to existing rights-of-way, the visual impact would 
be minimal. Additionally, the majority of the proposed aboveground facilities would be collocated with 
other aboveground facilities. This collocation would lessen the visual impact of the aboveground 


4-232 


facilities because their presence would be consistent with the current viewshed in the area. The 
aboveground facilities that would not be collocated with existing facilities would be painted to blend with 
the surrounding landscape. Therefore, the proposed Project would not significantly contribute to 
cumulative effects on visual resources. 

4.15.5 Socioeconomics 

Present and reasonably foreseeable future projects and activities could cumulatively impact 
socioeconomic conditions in the Project area. Employment, housing, infrastructure, and public services 
could experience both beneficial and detrimental impacts. 

Economy and Employment 

The projects considered in this section would have cumulative effects on employment during 
construction if more than one project is built at the same time. The North Baja Pipeline Expansion 
Project expects to employ up to 400 workers during the peak construction months for the B-Line but 
would be considerably less during other phases of construction. North Baja estimates that 25 percent of 
its construction workforce would be local hires. If the larger projects, such as the All-American Canal 
Lining Project, landfill and mine expansions, and residential development projects are built 
simultaneously, the demand for workers could exceed the local supply of appropriately skilled labor. The 
counties affected by the Project have a civilian labor force of about 2,230,030 people and an average 
unemployment rate of 6.5 percent. This suggests that the local labor force could meet much of the 
employment needs induced by construction of these projects, although it is unknown whether a sufficient 
number of these unemployed persons have the necessary skills to work on these projects. Therefore, if 
these projects are constructed at the same time, the demand for local workers may exceed supply. It is 
assumed that the remainder of the employment positions would be filled by non-local hires. Because 
North Baja currently operates pipeline facilities in the area, no additional permanent employees would be 
required. 

In addition to impacts on local employment, these projects would provide an increase in tax 
revenue for California, the counties, and other local economies through the payment of payroll tax, sales 
tax, property tax, and other taxes and fees. As discussed in Section 4.9.6, the estimated payroll for the 
proposed North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project would be $50 million during the construction phase and 
the annual property taxes are anticipated to be $3.4 million. A similar net increase in payroll and tax 
revenues could be expected from the other projects listed in Table 4.15-1. The proposed Project would 
have both short- and long-term beneficial impacts on State, county, and local economies. 

Temporary Housing 

Temporary housing for the construction workers would be needed for the portion of the 
workforce not drawn from the local area. For the proposed North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project, it is 
estimated that a maximum of 320 housing units would be needed per month to accommodate the non¬ 
resident construction workforce. Given the vacancy rates, the number of rental housing units in the area, 
and the number of hotel/motel rooms and campgrounds available in the cities and towns in the vicinity of 
the Project, construction crews should not encounter difficulty in finding temporary housing. If 
construction occurs concurrently with other projects, temporary housing would still be available but may 
be slightly more difficult to find and/or more expensive to secure. Regardless, these effects would be 
temporary, lasting only for the duration of construction, and there would be no long-term cumulative 
effect on housing from the proposed Project. 


4-233 


Public Services 


The cumulative impact of the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project and the other projects listed 
in Table 4.15-1 on infrastructure and public services would depend on the number of projects under 
construction at one time. The small incremental demands of several projects occurring at the same time 
could become difficult for police, fire, and emergency service personnel to address. This problem would 
be temporary, occur only for the length of construction, and could be mitigated by the various project 
sponsors providing their own personnel to augment the local capability or by providing additional funds 
or training for local personnel. No long-term cumulative effect on infrastructure and public services is 
anticipated from the proposed Project. 

4.15.6 Transportation and Traffic 

Where installation of the proposed Project occurs at road crossings, road traffic could be 
temporarily disrupted or delayed. The transportation system in the three counties where the proposed 
facilities would be constructed is well developed. Construction activities could disrupt traffic flow, and 
result in cumulative impacts on traffic in the Project area if several projects are being constructed at once. 
North Baja developed Traffic Management Plans for 18 th Avenue in Riverside County and for Imperial 
County roadways (see Appendix H) to mitigate impacts associated with construction along road 
shoulders. Other major roads and highways would be bored and construction would not affect traffic. 
The addition of traffic associated with construction personnel commuting to and from the Project sites 
could affect traffic congestion in the region if several of the projects listed in Table 4.15-1 would occur 
within the same time frame. However, workers associated with the North Baja Pipeline Expansion 
Project would commute to and from the pipe storage and contractor yards or aboveground facility sites 
during off-peak traffic hours (e.g., before 7:00 AM and after 6:00 PM). Workers traveling between the 
pipe storage and contractor yards and the construction site would likely share rides. Moreover, it is 
unlikely that each project would reach peak traffic conditions simultaneously; therefore, potential 
cumulative impacts on traffic from construction, should they occur, are expected to be temporary and 
short term. Once construction of the Project is complete, there would be no impacts on traffic from 
operation or maintenance of the facilities. 

4.15.7 Cultural Resources 

Past disturbances to cultural resources sites in the Project area have been related to legal 
collecting; accidental disturbance by OHV users; intentional destruction or vandalism; and construction 
and maintenance operations associated with existing roads, railroads, and transmission lines, including 
North Baja’s existing A-Line. The currently proposed projects listed in Table 4.15-1 that are defined as 
Federal actions would include mitigation measures designed to avoid or minimize additional direct 
impacts on cultural resources. Where direct impacts on significant cultural resources are unavoidable, 
mitigation (e.g., recovery and curation of materials) would occur before construction. Non-Federal 
actions would need to comply with any mitigation measures required by the State. Increased access by 
rights-of-way and service roads would increase the potential for trespass or vandalism at previously 
inaccessible sites. The proposed Project would only incrementally add to the effects of the other projects 
and result in less than significant impacts on cultural resources in the area. 

4.15.8 Air Quality 

The North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project and the projects listed in Table 4.15-1 would all 
involve the use of heavy equipment that would generate emissions of air contaminants and fugitive dust. 
The majority of these impacts would be minimized because the construction activities would occur over a 
large geographical area. Any air impacts would be localized and confined primarily to the airsheds in 


4-234 


which the projects occur. Cumulative impacts on air quality, therefore, would be limited primarily to 
areas where more than one project is proposed within the same airshed and would be constructed 
simultaneously. Several projects, primarily industrial and housing development projects, are planned in 
the vicinity of the Project and may be constructed within the same time frame. These effects could 
temporarily add to the ongoing effects from agricultural activities, traffic, and OHV use in the Project 
area. Mitigation measures similar to those outlined in Section 4.12.4 for the proposed Project would 
likely be required for these other projects. Because the projects listed in Table 4.15-1 would take place 
over a large area; have varying construction schedules; and adhere to Federal, State, and local regulations 
for the protection of ambient air quality, long-term cumulative impacts on air quality would not be 
anticipated. Additionally, because no additional compression would be installed, the proposed Project 
would not add any stationary or permanent sources of NO x , CO, VOC, PMi 0 , PM 25 , or S0 2 to the 
environment; therefore, operation of the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project would not contribute 
cumulatively to air quality. 

The North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project is not proposed to serve any new, modified, or 
expanded power plants in the Project area. However, it could be speculated that in the future the Project 
could transport gas for new or expanded power plants; therefore, the Project could result in a cumulative 
impact on the region’s air quality. Any new projects, including modification of existing facilities, would 
have to meet applicable air quality standards of the regions where they are located. 

As discussed in Section 1.4.1, Sempra’s existing Gasoducto Bajanorte pipeline would be 
expanded in coordination with North Baja’s phased expansion. The Gasoducto Bajanorte pipeline, which 
currently takes gas from the North Baja system at the U.S.-Mexico border and moves it west, would be 
reconfigured to move gas in the opposite direction, similar to the reconfiguration of the North Baja 
system that would occur during Phase I. Transport of the initial volumes of LNG-source gas would also 
require a new compressor station (Algodones Compressor Station) on the Gasoducto Bajanorte pipeline. 
This compressor station would be constructed about 2.5 miles south of the California-Mexico border and 
3 miles west of the Arizona-Mexico border in the State of Baja California del Norte just southwest of the 
border town of Algodones. All of the permits have been obtained for the reconfiguration of the 
Gasoducto Bajanorte pipeline and for the construction of the Algodones Compressor Station, which are 
planned for completion in late 2007. 

The capacity of the Gasoducto Bajanorte pipeline system would similarly be expanded in 
coordination with North Baja’s Phase II expansion. Up to 100 percent looping of the Gasoducto 
Bajanorte pipeline and additional compression would be required, both at the Algodones Compressor 
Station and at a new compressor station near Mexicali (Mexicali Compressor Station). These facilities 
would be constructed in 2009 to be operational by 2010. These facilities are shown on Figure 1.4-1. 

Because of the proximity of the proposed compressor stations in Mexico, the potential exists for 
operating emissions to affect air quality in the United States, specifically in the Imperial Valley portion of 
Imperial County. The cumulative impacts are described below by project phase. 

Phase I Air Quality Impacts - Algodones Compressor Station 

Using data provided by the turbine manufacturer and the operational data provided by Sempra, 
the emissions from the two proposed combustion turbines totaling 30,000 horsepower (hp) (15,000 hp in 
reserve), that would be located at the Algodones Compressor Station, were modeled to determine the 
impact on nearby receptor locations. Table 4.15.8-1 presents a summary of the modeling analysis results 
at the maximally impacted receptor in the vicinity of the U.S.-Mexico border. The data in Table 4.15.8-1 
indicate that emissions from the compressor station turbines would result in impacts below Federal 
significant impact levels and the U.S. and California State standards. 


4-235 


TABLE 4.15.8-1 


Phase 1 Algodones Compressor Station Impacts a 

Pollutant 

Averaging 

Period 

Background 

(pg/m 3 ) 

Modeled Impact 
(pg/m 3 ) 

Significant 
Impact Level 
(pg/m 3 ) 

Federal and State 
Standards (pg/m 3 ) b 

Is Standard 
Currently 
Exceeded? 

no 2 

1 hour 

355 

2.625 

NA 

NS/470 

No 


Annual AM 

25 

.044 

1 

100/NS 

No 

CO 

1 hour 

- 

3.748 

2000 

40,000/23,000 

No 


8 hour 

9,478 

1.325 

500 

10,000/10,000 

No 

PM 10 

24 hour 

509 

.083 

5 

150/50 

Yes 0 


Annual AM 

80 

.007 

1 

50/20 

Yes 0 

PM 2 .5 d 

24 Hour 

51.4 

.083 

5 

65/NS 

No 


Annual 

11.9 

.007 

1 

15/12 

No 

so 2 

1 hour 

- 

.017 

NA 

655/NS 

No 


3 hour 

- 

.015 

25 

1,300/NS 

No 


24 hour 

8 

.003 

5 

365/105 

No 


Annual AM 

- 

<.001 

1 

80/NS 

No 


pg/m 3 = micrograms per cubic meter 
N0 2 = nitrogen dioxide 
CO = carbon monoxide 

PMio = particulate matter having an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to 10 microns 
PM 2 5 = particulate matter having an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to 2.5 microns 
S0 2 = sulfur dioxide 

Modeled impacts are at a location in the vicinity of the U.S.-Mexico border, which is approximately 4 kilometers (4,000 
meters or 13,100 feet) from the compressor station site. Only one of the two proposed turbines would operate at any 
single time (i.e., the cumulative run time for both turbines would not exceed 8,760 hours per year, and two turbines 
would not run simultaneously.) 

b Federal standard/State standard. NS = no standard. 

The Project’s incremental impact would not result in a significant impact on the existing nonattainment area. 

d PM 2 .s emissions from the turbine were assumed to equal emissions of PM 10 per CARB particulate matter specification 

profiles. 


It should be noted that the PM|o/PM 25 impacts from the turbine would be insignificant (i.e., 
below the significant levels for Class II areas of 5 micrograms per cubic meter (jig/nr) on a 24-hour 
basis, and 1 |lg/m on an annual basis) and they are also below the significant monitoring concentration 
levels for PMi 0 of 10 jrg/nv on a 24-hour basis. However, a portion of Imperial County that is within the 
Project area (specifically the Imperial Valley) is nonattainment for PM )0 and unclassified for PM 25 , 
primarily due to ambient concentrations of windblown dust, not due to ambient concentrations of 
PM ] 0 /PM?5 from combustion sources. 

Phase II Air Quality Impacts - Algodones and Mexicali Compressor Stations 

Sempra has not yet signed precedent agreements with all of the potential shippers in Phase II and, 
therefore, has not developed design details for its Phase II expansion. Sempra has indicated to North 
Baja, however, that the following design assumptions would be applicable for purposes of analyzing the 
potential cumulative impacts of the future compression additions on the Sempra system as follows: 

• The Mexicali Compressor Station would be located on or adjacent immediately to the 
existing facilities (i.e., either the La Rosita Power Complex [LRPC] or the 
Termoelectrica de Mexicali Power Plant [TDM Plant]). 


4-236 






• The horsepower needed at the Mexicali Compressor Station would be approximately 
75,000, while the required horsepower proposed for the Algodones Compression Station 
would be approximately 116,000 (of which approximately 15,000 hp would be 
contributed by the two turbines already proposed for Phase I, which would leave an 
additional need at the site of approximately 100,000 hp). 

• The turbines would be equipped with the following emissions control technologies: 

• installation and operation of low NO x combustors; 

• good combustion practices would be implemented to reduce emissions of CO and 
VOC; and 

• clean fuels (natural gas) would be used to reduce emissions of PM 10 and PM 25 . 

If the new turbines would be located near the existing power plants west of Mexicali, the result 
would be the mixing of the new exhaust plumes with the existing plumes at the existing sites. A complete 
and rapid mixing of the plumes allows for the characterization of new impacts using the modeling 
scenarios established in the previous Imperial-Mexicali 230kV Transmission Lines (Imperial-Mexicali) 
final EIS (DOE 2004). This was accomplished assuming that the resulting downwind impacts would be 
directly proportional to emissions levels. Table 4.15.8-2 shows the predicted concentrations at the 
maximally impacted receptor in the vicinity of the U.S.-Mexico border resulting from both the LRPC and 
TDM Plant emissions as documented in Table 4.3-6 of the Imperial-Mexicali final EIS (DOE 2004). 


TABLE 4.15.8-2 


LRPC and TDM Plant Estimated Impacts 


Pollutant 

Average Period 

Impact at Maximum U.S. Receptor 
(pg/m 3 ) 

Significant Impact 
Level (pg/m 3 ) 

NAAQS (pg/m 3 ) 

CO w/o catalyst 

8 Hour 

7.67 

500 

40,000 

CO w/catalyst 

8 Hour 

1.09 

500 

40,000 

no 2 

1 Hour 

6.41 

NA 

NA 

pm 10 /pm 2 . 5 

24 Hour 

4.07/4.07 

5/5 

150/65 


pg/m 3 = micrograms per cubic meter 
N0 2 = nitrogen dioxide 
CO = carbon monoxide 

PM 10 = particulate matter having an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to 10 microns 
PM 2 s= particulate matter having an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to 2.5 microns 
NAAQS = National Ambient Air Quality Standards 


Table 4.15.8-3 shows the cumulative totals of emissions from the Mexicali Compressor Station 
added to the LRPC and TDM Plant, and emissions associated with the Phase I/Phase II Algodones 
Compressor Station. 


4-237 






TABLE 4.15.8-3 

Cumulative Estimated Emissions by Site 

Pollutant 

LRPC and TDM Plant (tpy) 

LRPC, TDM Plant, and Mexicali 
Compressor Station (tpy) 

Algodones Compressor Station 
Phase 1 and Phase II (tpy) 

NOx 

608 

843 

355.7 

CO 

3,089 

3,383 

442.1 

VOC 

1,069 

1,080.2 

16.4 

SOx 

30 

30.9 

2.5 

PM 10 /PM 2.5 

1,208/1,208 

1,192.4/1,192.4 

60.6/60.6 


tpy = tons per year 

NO x = nitrous oxides 

CO = carbon monoxide 

VOC = volatile organic compounds 

SO x = sulfur oxides 

PM 10 = particulate matter having an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to 10 microns 
PM 2 5 = particulate matter having an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to 2.5 microns 


Table 4.15.8-4 shows the resultant scaled ambient air quality impacts at the maximally impacted 
receptor location in the vicinity of the U.S.-Mexico border, considering the addition of the Mexicali 
Compressor Station emissions and the Phase I/II impacts at the Algodones Compressor Station for the 
same scenarios. 


TABLE 4.15.8-4 


Resultant Estimated Impacts at Maximum U.S. Receptor Locations 


Pollutant 

Average Time 

LRPC, TDM Plant, and 
Mexicali Compressor Station 3 
(pg/m 3 ) 

Algodones Compressor 
Station Phase 1 and 
Phase II (pg/m 3 ) 

Significant 
Impact Level 
(pg/m 3 ) 

NAAQS 

(pg/m 3 ) 

CO 

8 Hour 

8.40 

3.56 

500 

40,000 

no 2 

1 Hour 

8.88 

7.88 

NA 

NA 

PMio/PM 25 

24 Hour 

4 . 214.2 

0.28/0.28 

5/5 

150/65 


pg/m 3 = micrograms per cubic meter 
N0 2 = nitrogen dioxide 
CO = carbon monoxide 

PMio = particulate matter having an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to 10 microns 
PM 2 . 5 = particulate matter having an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to 2.5 microns 
NAAQS = National Ambient Air Quality Standards 


As shown in Table 4.15.8-4, no emitted pollutants at the Mexicali or Algodones Compressor 
Station sites would result in a predicted concentration above an established significant impact level (SDL) 
at the maximally impacted receptor located in the vicinity of the U.S.-Mexico border. 

The Algodones Compressor Station emissions were not included with the LRPC and TDM Plant 
and Mexicali Compressor Station site emissions for purposes of modeling the cumulative impacts due to 
the following: 


• the Algodones Compressor Station would be approximately 50+ miles (80+ kilometers) 
from the LRPC and TDM Plant sites; 


4-238 










• the generally accepted distance limitations of the ISCST3 dispersion model is 31 miles or 
50 kilometers; therefore, application of the model at these distances would produce 
questionable results; and 

• the cumulative impact of emissions from the Algodones on the LRPC/TDM Plant impact 
area, or vice versa, would be minimal considering the previous modeling performed for 
the LRPC/TDM Plant, and the recent modeling performed for the Algodones Compressor 
Station, which predicted concentrations below the established SILs within a few 
kilometers of the individual plant sites. 

In addition, SO? emissions were not evaluated in the cumulative impacts analysis due to the 
following: 

• emissions of SO? from all of the plants involved would not cumulatively add up to a 

value that exceeds the NSR or PSD major source threshold values; 

• each individual plant site has SO? emissions that are considered minor; 

• the previous final EIS analysis of emissions from the LRPC and TDM Plant only 

considered impacts from NO?, PM i0 , and CO, with no modeling data presented for SO?; 
therefore, it was not included in the cumulative impacts analysis; and 

• SO? impact data are presented for the Algodones Compressor Station (Phase I) in Table 
4.15.8-4. The predicted ambient concentrations of SO? were so low that impacts for the 
Algodones Compressor Station (Phase II) were not predicted based on the assumption 
that modeled ambient concentrations are directly proportional to emissions, and the SO? 
emissions at the Algodones Compressor Station only increased by approximately 1.87 
tpy, which if scaled from the Phase I impacts would not result in any SO? standard or SIL 
to be exceeded. 

Based on the above preliminary analysis, it is unlikely that emissions from the proposed future 
compressor stations would result in any significant cumulative ambient air quality impacts at receptors in 
the vicinity of or across the U.S. border. 

Air Toxics Emissions and Health Risk Impacts 

A Health Risk Assessment was conducted to determine the potential impacts of the toxic air 
pollutants emitted by the existing power plants and proposed compressor stations. The analysis also 
includes the LRPC and TDM Plant. 

Tables H-l and H-2 of the Imperial-Mexicali final EIS (DOE 2004) indicate that the total 
Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs) emissions from the LRPC and TDM Plant are 35.2 and 9.9 tpy, 
respectively. Estimated HAPs emissions for the future compressors at the Mexicali Compressor Station 
and for the compressors at the Algodones Compressor Station would be 3.03 tpy and 4.03 tpy, 
respectively. Assuming that the risks at the maximally impacted receptor are directly proportional to 
emissions, and keeping all the modeling and risk assessment parameters constant to those used in the 
HAPs risk assessment modeling undertaken in the Imperial-Mexicali FEIS, the changes in risk can be 
directly calculated via the ratio of known emissions and known risks to expected future emissions. Table 
4.15.8-5 presents the resultant scaled risk values subsequent to addition of the future compressor 
emissions. 


4-239 



TABLE 4.15.8-5 

Existing and Future Potential Risks 


Facility 

Cancer Risk per Million 3 

Chronic Hazard 
lndex b 

Acute Hazard Index 0 

Existing LRPC 

0.54 

0.002 

0.02 

Existing TDM Plant 

0.06 

0.0007 

0.007 

Algodones Compressor Station (Phase 1) 

0.008 

0.0002 

0.0005 

LRPC and Mexicali Compressor Station 

0.59 

0.0022 

0.022 

TDM Plant and Mexicali Compressor 
Station 

0.078 

0.0009 

0.009 

Algodones Compressor Station (Phase 

II) 

0.062 

0.0015 

0.004 

Significance Threshold 

1.0 

1.0 

1.0 

South Coast AQMD Threshold 

0.5 

0.5 

0.5 

Average risk values per Table H-6, Imperial-Mexicali final EIS (DOE 2004). 
b Chronic hazard results from long-term exposure. 

c Acute hazard results from short-term exposure. 



As shown in Table 4.15.8-5, the average cancer risks, as well as the chronic and acute hazard 
indexes, would be well below the established significance thresholds used by California air districts. In 
addition, the future chronic and acute hazard indexes would also be well below the more stringent 
thresholds set by the South Coast AQMD for these evaluations at a level of 0.5. Therefore, the cumulative 
risks associated with the emissions from the existing power plants and the future compressor stations 
would be considered less than significant. 

A comment was received requesting the identification of air impacts resulting from the total 
number of power plants and future development projects that could be constructed within the Southeast 
Desert Air Basin (SEDAB) and evaluation of the potential long-term air quality deterioration and possible 
human health impacts. Table 4.15-1 contains all “reasonably foreseeable future projects” within the 
SEDAB. Section 15144 of the State CEQA Guidelines states, in part, “While foreseeing the 
unforeseeable is not possible, an agency must use its best efforts to find out and disclose all that it 
reasonably can.” 

4.15.9 Noise 

Because the impact of noise is highly localized and attenuates quickly as the distance from the 
noise source increases, cumulative impacts associated with construction or operation would be unlikely 
unless one or more of the projects listed in Table 4.15-1 is constructed at the same time in the same 
location. However, even short-term additional noise during construction could, for example, create 
enough disturbance to nesting birds or breeding toads to constitute a potential adverse impact. Although 
the Project could result in cumulative noise impacts if other projects listed in Table 4.15-1 would be 
constructed within the same time frame and vicinity, the majority of these impacts would be limited to the 
period of construction. 

4.15.10 Reliability and Safety 

Impact on reliability and public safety would be mitigated through the use of the DOT Minimum 
Federal Safety Standards in Title 49 CFR Part 192 and the California Public Utilities Commission, 
General Order 1I2-E., which are intended to protect the public and to prevent natural gas facility 
accidents and failures. In addition, North Baja’s construction contractors would be required to comply 


4-240 






with the OSHA Safety and Health Regulations for Construction in Title 29 CFR Part 1926. Should a 
pipeline failure occur on the A-Line and the B-Line simultaneously, the PIR would fall within the PIR 
footprint of a failure of the proposed B-Line; therefore, the close proximity of the A-Line to the B-Line 
would not result in a cumulative impact on the PIR calculated for the Project. No cumulative impacts on 
safety and reliability would be anticipated to occur. 

4.15.11 Environmental Justice 

As discussed in Section 4.17, some communities within the PIR of the Project have low-income 
and minority populations compared to the affected counties as a whole. As a result, there is a potential 
for these populations to bear a disproportionate share of an adverse impact. However, none of the 
potential impacts of the Project that could affect environmental justice issues are considered significant. 
Therefore, the Project would neither result in a disproportionately high and adverse effect or impact on 
minority or low-income populations nor contribute to a cumulative impact on these populations. 

4.15.12 Conclusion 

The majority of cumulative impacts would be temporary and minor. However, long-term 
cumulative impacts would occur on vegetation, wildlife habitat, and special status species. Long-term 
cumulative benefits would be realized from the boost to the local economy associated with tax revenues. 
Short-term cumulative benefits would also be realized through jobs and wages and purchases of goods 
and materials. 

4.15.13 Arrowhead Alternative 

Construction of the Arrowhead Alternative would result in cumulative impacts on prime 
farmland. Construction of a pig launcher would result in the permanent loss of about 0.8 acre of prime 
farmland and farmland of Statewide importance. 

4.15.14 No Project Alternative 

Under the No Project Alternative, no resources as discussed in each section would be affected; 
therefore, no cumulative impacts would result from this alternative. 


4-241 


4.16 GROWTH-INDUCING IMPACTS 


The CEQA requires the consideration and discussion in an EIR of the growth-inducing impact of 
a proposed project. NEPA does not have a similar requirement. As specified in sections 15126.2 (d) of 
the State CEQA Guidelines, an EIR shall: 

Discuss the ways in which the proposed project could foster economic or population growth, or 
the construction of additional housing, either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment. 
Included in this are projects that would remove obstacles to population growth (a major expansion of a 
waste water treatment plant might, for example, allow for more construction in service areas). Increases 
in the population may tax existing community service facilities, requiring construction of new facilities 
that could cause significant environmental effects. Also discuss the characteristics of some projects that 
may encourage and facilitate other activities that could significantly affect the environment, either 
individually or cumulatively. It must not be assumed that growth in any area is necessarily beneficial, 
detrimental, or of little significance to the environment. 

Most development projects could induce growth in the area in which they are located. The 
following six criteria are used as a guide to evaluating the growth-inducing potential for the proposed 
Project. 


1. Would the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project foster growth or remove obstacles to 
economic or population growth? 

The Project area is already served by various fuel supplies and economic activity is already taking 
place. The demand for energy and the proposed pipeline and Blythe connection are a result of, rather than 
a precursor to, development in this region. The region is currently undergoing significant growth and 
while there is no evidence at this time that the growth is being constrained by the lack of energy 
availability, the HD’s Unit 3 Repower Project would increase its generating capacity by 84 megawatts, 
from 44 megawatts to 128 megawatts. Although it is recognized that the availability of a new or an 
alternative source of natural gas may be a contributing factor in stimulating economic and population 
growth and could result in the construction of additional power infrastructure, none of the power plants 
that the Project would serve are solely dependent on the supply from the proposed Project. However, to 
the extent that the IID’s Unit 3 Repower Project would diversify its suppliers of natural gas, the additional 
gas supplied by the proposed Project could be a growth-inducing impact. Local factors that could also 
influence or restrict growth include availability of infrastructure, such as roads and sewer connections, 
and availability of water. 

2. Would the Project provide new employment? 

It is anticipated that the proposed North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project would provide 
temporary employment for between 300 and 400 construction workers during the peak construction 
period. North Baja does not anticipate adding permanent staff to handle Project operations. 

3. Would the Project provide new access to undeveloped or under developed areas? 

The Project would require the creation of only three new permanent roads (totaling less than 0.2 
mile). These roads would be used to gain access to the Blythe Meter Station site, the Ogliby Meter 
Station and odorant facility, and the tap to the B-Line and pig launcher at the beginning of the IID Lateral. 
North Baja would use either new temporary access roads or existing access roads to access the remainder 
of the Project. North Baja would implement OHV controls such as soil or rock berms and salvaged 
vegetation to prevent OHV use in environmentally sensitive areas. 


4-242 


4. Would the Project extend public service to a previously unserved area? 

The Project would not extend public service to areas currently unserved by natural gas. The 
primary result of the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project would be to meet increased energy demands 
from existing customers and to provide an alternate supply of natural gas to existing power plants. 

5. Would the Project tax existing community services? 

The number of non-local workers would be small relative to current populations in the Project 
area and local communities have adequate infrastructure and community services to meet the needs of 
these non-local workers. 

6. Would the Project cause development elsewhere? 

As stated above, the power plants that would be served by the North Baja Pipeline Expansion 
Project are not solely dependent on the Project for an energy source. Therefore, the addition or absence 
of the gas supply from the proposed Project would not affect development. The Project is being proposed 
to meet existing energy needs and is not dependent upon future power plant expansions. However, the 
Project would link markets in southern California and other areas of the Southwest with an alternative 
source of natural gas. 

The BEI Lateral would serve the Blythe Energy Facility I, an existing power plant. No expansion 
plans for the Blythe Energy Facility I have been identified. The Blythe Energy Project Phase II was 
approved by the CEC in December 2005; however, this project is a separately owned project and is not a 
shipper on the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project. The Blythe Energy Project Phase II was proposed 
prior to construction of the A-Line and approved before North Baja submitted its application to the 
FERC. During the scoping process, a comment was received from the EPA requesting that the growth 
and resulting impacts attributable to the IID Lateral be addressed. The IID Lateral would provide an 
alternate source of natural gas to the El Centro Generating Station and would have additional capacity that 
could support future expansions of the station. As discussed in Section 1.4.1, the IID has proposed an 
expansion at the station (the Unit 3 Repower) to serve the growing electrical load demands of the region. 
The El Centro Generating Station could be further expanded if and when IID determines that the electrical 
needs within its service territory have grown or will grow sufficiently to need additional generation. 

While the Project is not associated with or dependent upon any specific expansions of power 
generation facilities or other industrial or residential developments, the availability of an alternative 
source of natural gas to the region could affect economic growth by exerting downward pressure on 
natural gas prices, by increasing competition among gas-producing regions. Lower or stable natural gas 
pricing could, in combination with other factors, either contribute to a positive economic climate 
conducive to growth, or moderate a scenario where higher gas prices may inhibit growth. 

If the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project is constructed, additional pipeline capacity would be 
available, which could potentially accommodate future projected growth in the Southwest and southern 
California regions. For this additional pipeline capacity to be fully utilized, the capacity of the Gasoducto 
Bajanorte pipeline would need to be doubled by looping the pipeline and adding compression. However, 
there is no evidence that the growth projected for the regions would be constrained by any assumed lack 
of availability of natural gas. Therefore, although the Project could support the projected growth, the 
growth could occur whether or not the Project is constructed. 


4-243 


Summary 


The potential growth-inducing impact of the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project would be the 
delivery of an alternative or additional source of natural gas to existing natural gas users as described in 
Section 1.1. Providing an alternate fuel supply could lead to a positive economic environment conducive 
to growth or prevent increases in energy costs that might restrict growth. The existing power plants that 
would be supplied by the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project (i.e., the Blythe Energy Facility I and the 
IID El Centro Generating Station) would not be solely dependent on the gas supplied by the Project. 
Potential infrastructure growth might occur with or without the construction of the pipeline and thus 
would not be attributable to the proposed Project. However, to the extent that the IID Unit 3 Repower 
Project would diversify its suppliers of natural gas, the additional gas supplied by the proposed Project 
could be a growth-inducing impact. 


4-244 


4.17 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE 


Environmental justice is concerned with the question of whether a proposed project would expose 
minority or disadvantaged populations to proportionately greater risks or impacts compared to those 
borne by other individuals. This section identifies populations with a relatively high representation of 
minority or low-income status and evaluates whether the proposed Project would result in significant 
adverse effects that disproportionately affect identified minority or low-income populations. 

4.17.1 Significance Criteria 

An environmental justice impact would be considered significant if Project construction or 
operation would: 

• result in a disproportionately high and adverse effect or impact. This “means an adverse 
effect or impact that: (1) is predominantly borne by any segment of the population, 
including a minority and/or a low-income population; or (2) would be suffered by a 
minority and/or low-income population and is appreciably more severe, or greater in 
magnitude, than the adverse effect or impact that would be suffered by a non-minority 
and/or non-low-income population.” ( Toolkit for Assessing Potential Allegations of 
Environmental Injustice [EPA 2004]). 

4.17.2 Background and Regulatory Setting 

The EPA defines environmental justice as the “fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all 
people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to the development, 
implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and polices.” Similarly, 
environmental justice is defined in California State planning law as the “fair treatment of people of all 
races, cultures, and incomes with respect to the development, adoption, implementation, and enforcement 
of environmental laws, regulations, and polices.” The EPA’s Toolkit for Assessing Potential Allegations 
of Environmental Injustice (EPA 2004) provides the following definitions for use in analyzing 
environmental justice impacts: 

• Low-income means a person whose median household income is at or below the U.S. 
Department of Health and Human Services poverty guidelines. 

• Low-income population means any readily identifiable group of low-income persons who 
live in geographic proximity, and, if circumstances warrant, geographically 
dispersed/transient persons (such as migrant farm workers or Native Americans) who will 
be similarly affected by a proposed project or action. 

• Minority means a person, as defined by the U.S. Bureau of Census, who is a: (1) Black 
American (a person having origins in any of the black racial groups of Africa); (2) 
Hispanic person (a person of Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban, Central or South American, 
or other Spanish culture or origin, regardless of race); (3) Asian American or Pacific 
Islander (a person having origins in any of the original peoples of the Far East, Southeast 
Asia, the Indian subcontinent, or the Pacific Islands); or (4) American Indian or Alaskan 
Native (a person having origins in any of the original people of North America and 
maintains cultural identification through tribal affiliation or community recognition). 

• Minority population means any readily identifiable group of minority persons who live in 
geographic proximity, and, if circumstances warrant, geographically dispersed/transient 


4-245 


persons (such as migrant farm workers or Native Americans) who will be similarly 
affected by a proposed project or action. Minority populations should be identified where 
either: (1) the minority population of the affected area exceeds 50 percent or (2) the 
minority population percentage of the affected area is meaningfully greater than the 
minority population percentage in the general population or other appropriate unit of 
geographic analysis. 

The major Federal and State laws, regulations, policies, and plans related to environmental justice 
are summarized in Table 4.17.2-1. No regional or local environmental justice policies and/or assessments 
have been performed by agencies within the study area. 

To determine whether disproportionately high and adverse effects or impacts would occur, the 
EPA recommends a four-step process for carrying out an environmental justice assessment: (1) problem 
formation; (2) data collection; (3) assessment of the potential for adverse impacts; and (4) assessment of 
the potential for disproportionately high adverse impacts (EPA 2004). 

During the problem formation step, the affected area is identified. The data collection step 
involves identifying environmental sources of stress and the likelihood of exposure, and collecting health- 
related, demographic, social, and economic data on the affected area. The third step involves assessing 
the adverse impacts on the environment and human health, and the fourth step is determining whether 
adverse impacts are disproportionately high in the affected area compared with the reference population. 
The use of specific components of this methodology is intended to be flexible. These steps are discussed 
below. 

4.17.3 Identification of Affected Area for Environmental Justice Analysis 

As discussed in Section 4.14.2, the DOT has developed a criterion for identifying HCAs. HCAs 
are calculated using a PIR, which is the radius of a circle within which the potential failure of a pipeline 
could have considerable impact on people or property. The PIR is proportional to the maximum 
allowable pipeline pressure and the pipeline diameter and was used to determine the specific area of 
potential impact associated with the Project. After the PIR for the pipeline and lateral facilities was 
determined, the affected census tracts within the PIR were identified. Table 4.17.3-1 identifies the PIR 
associated with the proposed pipeline and laterals as well as the affected census tracts within the PIR. 

Within the census tracts affected by the PIR, census block-level data were analyzed for ethnic and 
racial data and census block group-level data were analyzed for income-related data. As previously 
discussed, approximately 90 percent of the land affected by construction and operation of the Project 
would be authorized by the BLM on public lands (including lands managed by the BLM, the BOR, and 
the FWS) (53 percent), California counties (36 percent), the States of Arizona or California or cities (less 
than 1 percent), or the CSLC (less than 1 percent). The remainder of the land that would be affected (10 
percent) is privately owned. Because of the large amount of public land crossed, most of the census 
blocks along the proposed pipeline routes (about 78 percent) are unpopulated (see Table 4.17.3-2). In 
total, the PIR associated with the proposed Project would affect 1 populated census block in La Paz 
County, 37 populated census blocks in Riverside County, and 40 populated census blocks in Imperial 
County. These 78 populated census blocks within the PIR were, therefore, considered the area of 
potential impact for the purposes of the environmental justice analysis. 


4-246 


TABLE 4.17.2-1 


Major Laws, Regulatory Requirements, Policies, and Plans for Environmental Justice 


Law/Regulation/Policy/Agency 

FEDERAL 

Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. 
Constitution 

Executive Order on Federal Actions to 
Address Environmental Justice in 
Minority Populations and Low-Income 
Populations (referred to as Executive 
Order 12898) (1994) 


Environmental Justice Implementation 
Plan (1997) 

Final Guidance for Incorporating 
Environmental Justice Concerns in EPA’s 
NEPA Compliance Analysis (1998) 


Toolkit for Assessing Potential 
Allegations of Environmental Injustice 
(2004) 


Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations Part 
192 


STATE 

California Constitution 
Government Code Section 65040.12 

Government Code Section 65040.2 


Key Elements and Thresholds 


• The Fourteenth Amendment expressly provides that the States may not “deny to 
any person within [their] jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” 

• Designed to focus attention on environmental and human health conditions in areas 
of high minority populations and low-income communities, and promote non¬ 
discrimination in programs and projects substantially affecting human health and 
the environment. 

• Requires the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and all other Federal 
agencies (as well as State agencies receiving Federal funds) to develop strategies 
to address this issue. 

• Requires that disproportionately high and adverse health or environmental impacts 
on minority and low-income populations be avoided or minimized to the extent 
feasible. 

• Requires Federal agencies to achieve environmental justice by identifying and 
addressing disproportionately high and adverse human health and environmental 
programs, polices, and activities on minority populations and low-income 
populations in the United States. 

• Supplements the EPA environmental justice strategy and provides a framework for 
the development of specific plans and guidance for implementing Executive Order 
12898. 

• Provides a framework for the assessment of environmental justice in the 
preparation of environmental impact statements (EISs) and environmental 
assessments under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). 

• Emphasizes the importance of selecting an analytical process appropriate to the 
unique circumstances of the potentially affected community. 

• Provides a conceptual and substantive framework for understanding the EPA’s 
environmental justice program. 

• Presents a systematic approach with reference tools that can be used and adapted 
to assess and respond to potential allegations of environmental injustice as they 
occur, or to prevent injustices from occurring in the first place. 

The Final Rule on Operator Public Awareness Programs (May 2005) states, in part, 

that: 

• The operator’s [public awareness] program must specifically include provisions to 
educate the public, appropriate government organizations, and persons engaged in 
excavation-related activities. 

• The program must include activities to advise affected municipalities, school 
districts, businesses, and residents of pipeline facility locations. 

• The program and the media used must be as comprehensive as necessary to reach 
all areas in which the operator transports gas. 

• The program must be conducted in English and in other languages commonly 
understood by a significant number and concentration of the non-English speaking 
population in the operator’s area. 

• Provides for equal protection. 

• Defines environmental justice and designates the Office of Planning and Research 
as the coordinator for the State’s environmental justice program. 

• Requires the Office of Planning and Research to develop environmental justice 
guidelines for local general plans. 


4-247 





TABLE 4.17.2-1 (cont’d) 


Major Laws, Regulatory Requirements, Policies, and Plans for Environmental Justice 


Law/Regulation/Policy/Agency 


Key Elements and Thresholds 


Governor’s Office of Planning and 
Research - State of California General 
Plan Guidelines 


• Provides guidelines for local agencies on integrating environmental justice issues 
into their general plans. 

• Identifies procedural and geographic inequity. 


• Recommends that cities and counties develop public participation strategies that 
allow for early and meaningful community involvement in the general plan process 
by all affected population groups. 


• Recommends gathering socioeconomic data to improve the public participation 
process, identify underserved neighborhoods, plan for infrastructure and housing, 
and identify low-income and minority neighborhoods in which industrial facilities and 
uses that pose a significant hazard to human health and safety may be 
overconcentrated. 


California State Lands Commission 
(CSLC) - Environmental Justice Policy 
Statement in April 2002, amended 
October 2002 (see www.slc.ca.gov for 
the entire policy statement) 


• Recommends incorporating polices supportive of environmental justice in all of the 
mandatory elements of the general plan. 

• Developed to ensure equity and fairness in the CSLC’s processes and procedures, 
including that “environmental justice is an essential consideration in the 
Commission’s processes, decision, and programs and that all people who live in 
California have a meaningful way to participate in these activities." 

• Stresses equitable treatment of all members of the public and commits to consider 
environmental justice in its processes, decision-making, and regulatory affairs, 
which are implemented, in part, through identification of and communication with 
relevant populations that could be adversely and disproportionately impacted by 
CSLC projects or programs and by ensuring that a range of reasonable alternatives 
is identified that would minimize or eliminate environmental impacts affecting such 
populations. 

• The staff of the CSLC is required to report back to the Commission on how 
environmental justice is integrated into its programs, processes, and activities. 


4-248 





TABLE 4.17.3-1 


Potential Impact Radius Associated with the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 


Facility/Milepost Range 

Location 

Pipe Diameter 
(inches) 

Potential Impact 
Radius (feet) 

Census Tracts 
Affected 

B-Line 

MPs 0.0 to 0.2 

La Paz County, Arizona 

42 

982 a 

206 

MPs 0.2 to 11.7 

Riverside County, California 

42 

982 a 

459, 460 

MPs 11.7 to 22.3 

Riverside County, California 

48 

1,123 3 

458,459 

MPs 22.3 to 79.8 

Imperial County, California 

48 

1,123 a 

124 

BEI Lateral 

MPs 0.0 to 0.6 

Riverside County, California 

10 

252 

460 

IID Lateral 

MPs 0.0 to 45.7 

Imperial County, California 

16 

374 

108, 112.01, 113, 


114,124 


A simultaneous failure of the existing A-Line would fall within the footprint of a failure of the proposed B-Line (which is 
the bigger diameter). 



TABLE 4 17.3-2 

Unpopulated Census Blocks within the Potential Impact Radius Associated with the 

North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 


State/County 

Number of Census Blocks 

Number of Unpopulated 
Census Blocks 

Unpopulated Percent 

Arizona 

La Paz County 

5 

4 


80.0 

California 

Riverside County 

85 

48 


79.7 

Imperial County 

263 

223 


84.8 

Project Total 

353 

275 


77.9 

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, American FactFinder 2000a. 





4.17.4 Demographic and Economic Data 

This section describes the composition and distribution of minority and low-income populations 
in the States of Arizona and California as well as the counties and populated census blocks affected by the 
PIR associated with the Project and identifies populations with a relatively high representation of 
minority or low-income status. Because most of the facilities associated with the proposed Project are in 
rural, unincorporated areas, county-level data rather than city-level data were used as a reference 
population in this analysis. The U.S. Census Bureau’s American Fact Finder 2000 database was analyzed 
to obtain the racial and ethnic composition of smaller geographic areas, including census tracts, census 
block groups, and census blocks, to identify potential pockets of minority communities that may not be 
apparent when analyzing aggregated data on a county or State level. 10 Once populations with a relatively 

10 A census tract, which averages about 4,000 inhabitants, is delineated as a relatively homogeneous unit with respect to population 
characteristics, economic status, and living conditions. A subdivision of a census tract, a census block group is the smallest geographic unit 
for which the U.S. Census Bureau tabulates sample data. A census block group consists of all the blocks within a census tract with the same 
beginning number. A census block is the smallest geographic unit for which the U.S. Census Bureau tabulates 100 percent data. Many 
census blocks correspond to individual city blocks bounded by streets; however, census blocks, especially in rural areas, may include many 
square miles and may have some boundaries that are not streets. 


4-249 











high representation of minority or low-income status are identified, the impact analysis in Section 4.17.5 
discusses whether the Project would disproportionately affect such identified minority or low-income 
populations. 

4.17.4.1 Minority Population 

Table 4.17.4-1 presents the ethnic and racial composition of the population in the States, 
Counties, and populated census blocks affected by the Project." 


TABLE 4.17.4-1 


Summary of Racial and Ethnic Demographics within the Potential Impact Radius 
Associated with the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project a 


Location 

Total 

Population 

Percent 

White 

Percent 
Black or 
African 
American 

Percent 
American 
Indian & 
Alaska 
Native 

Percent 

Asian 

Percent 
Native 
Hawaiian & 
Other 
Pacific 
Islander 

Percent 

Other 

Race 

Percent 
Hispanic or 
Latino -Any 
Race 

Percent 

Minority 

Arizona 

5,130,632 

75.5 

3.1 

5.0 

1.8 

0.1 

14.5 

25.3 

24.5 

La Paz County 

19,715 

74.2 

0.8 

12.5 

0.4 

0.1 

12.0 

22.4 

25.8 

Census Blocks 
Affected by the 
B-Line 

4 

75.0 

0.0 

25.0 

0.0 

0.0 

0.0 

0.0 

25.0 

California 

33,871,648 

59.5 

6.7 

1.0 

10.9 

0.3 

21.6 

32.4 

40.5 

Riverside County 

1,545,387 

65.6 

6.2 

1.2 

3.7 

0.3 

23.0 

36.2 

34.4 

Census Blocks 
Affected by the 
B-Line and BEI 
Lateral 

736 

73.4 

4.3 

1.6 

0.1 

0.5 

20.0 

31.9 

26.6 

Imperial County 

142,361 

49.4 

4.0 

1.9 

2.0 

0.1 

42.6 

72.2 

50.6 

Census Blocks 
Affected by the 
B-Line and IID 
Lateral 

622 

63.0 

3.1 

1.3 

0.2 

0.0 

32.5 

58.5 

37.0 


2004 data are available for the State and county levels, but are not available for census block levels. In order to be 
consistent, 2000 data were used throughout. 

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Census 2000a. 


As shown in Table 4.17.4-1, the Hispanic or Latino population within the census blocks affected 
by the B-Line and IID Lateral in Imperial County is 58.5 percent, which is greater than the 50 percent 
threshold used by the EPA to define a minority population. However, the percentage of Hispanic 
population affected by the Project in Imperial County is less than the percentage of the Hispanic 
population in the county as a whole (72.2 percent). Although there are too few individuals living in La 
Paz County’s affected census blocks for derived statistics to be meaningful (only four people total), they 
are in the tables of this section for the sake of completeness. In the census blocks potentially affected by 
the B-Line within Riverside County, 1.6 percent is American Indian and/or Alaska Native, and 0.5 
percent is Native Hawaiian and/or Other Pacific Islander, which is an appreciably higher percentage than 


11 Historically, the U.S. Census Bureau has classified race and Hispanic origin as two separate concepts. The recent introduction of the option 
to report more than one race added more complexity to the presentation and comparison of U.S. Census data Race and Hispanic origin are 
two separate concepts in the Federal statistical system. People who are Hispanic may be of any race. Each person has two attributes, their 
race (or races) and whether or not they are Hispanic. Overlap of race and Hispanic origin is the main comparability issue. For more 
information on the definition of the term “Hispanic” see U.S. Census Bureau, 2004 
http.y/www.census.gov/popiilation/www/soedemo/comnraceho.html . This document uses the term “Hispanic or Latino.” 


4-250 









the county average as a whole (1.2 and 0.3 percent, respectively). Within the census blocks potentially 
affected by the B-Line and IID Lateral in Imperial County, there are no minority populations that 
comprise a higher percentage of the total population than the county as a whole. Therefore, the detailed 
census block analysis of the ethnic composition of the population focuses only on the Hispanic or Latino 
population in the census blocks potentially affected by the B-Line and IID Lateral in Imperial County (see 
Table 4.17.4-2), the American Indian and/or Alaska Native population affected by the B-Line in La Paz 
County (see Table 4.17.4-3), and the American Indian and/or Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian and/or 
Other Pacific Islander populations affected by the B-Line in Riverside County (see Table 4.17.4-4). 


TABLE 4.17.4-2 

Populated Census Blocks Containing Hispanic or Latino Populations within the Potential Impact Radius 

Associated with the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project in Imperial County 

Location 

Total Population 

Total Number of Hispanic or 
Latino Individuals 

Percent Hispanic or Latino 

California 

33,871,648 

10,966,556 


32.4 

Imperial County 

142,361 

102,817 


72.2 

Census Tract 108, Block 1379 

2 

2 


100.0 

Census Tract 108, Block 1398 

8 

2 


25.0 

Census Tract 108, Block 2054 

5 

5 


100.0 

Census Tract 108, Block 2078 

5 

5 


100.0 

Census Tract 108, Block 2083 

2 

2 


100.0 

Census Tract 112.01, Block 2014 

39 

37 


94.9 

Census Tract 113, Block 1055 

9 

7 


77.8 

Census Tract 113, Block 1057 

19 

12 


63.2 

Census Tract 113, Block 1058 

149 

114 


76.5 

Census Tract 113, Block 1065 

48 

40 


83.3 

Census Tract 113, Block 1070 

61 

45 


73.8 

Census Tract 113, Block 1072 

13 

2 


15.4 

Census Tract 113, Block 1100 

8 

4 


50.0 

Census Tract 113, Block 1107 

16 

8 


50.0 

Census Tract 113, Block 1115 

6 

6 


100.0 

Census Tract 113, Block 1116 

8 

6 


75.0 

Census Tract 113, Block 1120 

2 

2 


100.0 

Census Tract 113, Block 1152 

3 

1 


33.3 

Census Tract 113, Block 2000 

53 

38 


71.7 

Census Tract 113, Block 5018 

2 

1 


50.0 

Census Tract 124, Block 2101 

21 

6 


28.6 

Census Tract 124, Block 2493 

6 

1 


16.7 

Census Tract 124, Block 2568 

38 

18 


47.4 

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Census 2000a. 





4-251 






TABLE 4.17.4-3 

Populated Census Blocks Containing American Indian or Alaska Native Populations within the Potential Impact Radius 
Associated with the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project in La Paz County 

Total Number of American Indian or Percent American Indian or 
Location Total Population Alaska Native Individuals Alaska Native 

Arizona 5,130,632 255,879 5.0 

La Paz County 19,715 2,470 12.5 

Census Tract 206, Block 1075 4 1 25.0 

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Census 2000a. 


TABLE 4.17.4-4 


Populated Census Blocks Containing American Indian, Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian, and Other Pacific Islander 

Populations within the Potential Impact Radius Associated with 
the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project in Riverside County 


Location 

Total 

Population 

Total Number of 
American Indian 
& Alaska Native 

Percent 

American Indian 
& Alaska Native 

Total Number 
Native Hawaiian 
& Other Pacific 
Islander 

Percent Native 
Hawaiian & 
Other Pacific 
Islander 

California 

33,871,648 

333,346 

1.0 

116,961 

0.3 

Riverside County 

1,545,387 

18,168 

1.2 

3,902 

0.3 

Census Tract 458, Block 6214 

68 

1 

1.5 

0 

0.0 

Census Tract 459, Block 1122 

12 

6 

50.0 

0 

0.0 

Census Tract 460, Block 2014 

116 

1 

0.9 

0 

0.0 

Census Tract 460, Block 2037 

30 

2 

6.7 

4 

13.3 

Census Tract 460, Block 2056 

68 

2 

2.9 

0 

0.0 


Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Census 2000a. 


The census block data presented in Table 4.17.4-2 show the number and percent of the population 
that are Hispanic or Latino in the blocks that contain those populations within the PIR of the Project in 
Imperial County. The percentage of Hispanics or Latinos in each census block are presented in 
comparison with county and State percentages. When looking at the affected census blocks, 14 of the 
affected blocks contain greater than 50 percent Hispanic or Latino populations. Of these 14 blocks, 12 
also contain a higher percentage of Hispanics or Latinos than the county average as a whole. 

Table 4.17.4-3 shows the number and percentage of persons identifying themselves as American 
Indians and/or Alaska Natives in the populated census block affected in La Paz County. The percentage 
of American Indians and/or Alaska Natives in this census block is presented in comparison with county 
and State percentages. In 2000, the percentage of American Indians and/or Alaska Natives comprised 25 
percent of the total population in the populated block. This percentage is twice the percentage of the 
county as a whole, and five times the average for the State of Arizona (12.5 and 5 percent, respectively). 
It is important to note, however, that this census block contains only four persons, of which one is 
American Indian or an Alaska Native. 

The census block data presented in Table 4.17.4-4 show the number and percent of the population 
that are American Indians, Alaska Natives, Native Hawaiians, and/or Other Pacific Islanders in the blocks 
that contain those populations within the PIR of the B-Line in Riverside County. The percentage of 
American Indians, Alaska Natives, Native Hawaiians, and/or Other Pacific Islanders in each census block 
is presented in comparison with county and State percentages. Four of the five populated census blocks 


4-252 










identified in Table 4.17.4-4 have higher percentages of American Indians and/or Alaska Natives than the 
county as a whole. In addition, one census block has four Native Hawaiians and/or Other Pacific 
Islanders, comprising 13.3 percent of the population, compared to an average of 0.3 percent for both the 
county and State. 

It should be noted that because of the often irregular sizes and shapes of census blocks, not all 
residents included in each block identified as having minority populations live in close enough proximity 
to the proposed pipeline route to be impacted. Nevertheless, the data show that minority populations are 
present along the proposed pipeline routes and, therefore, there is a potential for disproportionate adverse 
impacts on these minority communities. 

Although the information discussed in this section is based on information from the U.S. Bureau 
of the Census, the potential exists for migrant minority populations to have been underestimated by the 
census in the Project area. In California, this can occur in areas with large populations of migrant workers 
associated with large agricultural operations, particularly orchards. It is possible that such populations 
exist within the Project area in the agricultural areas concentrated near Blythe and the western portion of 
the IID Lateral; however, based on a review of aerial photographs, no orchards occur on the land that 
would be affected by the Project. Nevertheless, there is a potential for disproportionate adverse impacts 
on these communities. 

As discussed in Section 4.17.3, the majority of the census blocks within the PIR associated with 
the Project are unpopulated. Even though the census blocks are unpopulated, there can still be an 
environmental justice concern if property is owned by a member of a minority group or there are 
resources such as traditional cultural properties nearby. The majority of the land associated with the 
unpopulated census blocks is managed by Federal agencies (i.e., the BLM, the BOR, the FWS). No tribal 
lands would be crossed. In addition, no traditional cultural properties have been identified in the 
proposed Project’s area of potential effect to date (see Section 4.11.5). 

4.17.4.2 Income Distribution in the Project Area 

Table 4.17.4-5 presents the income distribution within the Project area based on statistics from 
the U.S. Census Bureau. The U.S. Census Bureau uses the poverty guidelines developed annually by the 
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to determine the percentage of the population living 
below the poverty line. The poverty guidelines do not vary geographically within the conterminous 
United States and are determined based on the size of the family, ages of family members, and the total 
family income. On average, La Paz, Riverside, and Imperial Counties all had significantly lower annual 
per capita and household income levels and similar or higher poverty levels than their respective State 
averages. However, in the case of Riverside and Imperial Counties, this is due in part to these counties 
being more rural than the highly urbanized western portion of the State of California. 


4-253 


TABLE 4.17.4-5 

Summary of Income Distribution within the Potential Impact Radius 

Associated with the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 

Location 

Total Population 
(2000) 

Per Capita 
Income (1999) 

Median Household 
Income (1999) 

Percentage of 
Persons Below 
Poverty (1999) 

Arizona 

5,130,632 

$20,275 

$40,558 

13.6 

La Paz County 

19,715 

$14,916 

$25,839 

19.3 

Census Tract 206, Block Group 1 

1,356 

$14,372 

$27,000 

22.6 

California 

33,871,648 

$22,711 

$47,493 

13.9 

Riverside County 

1,545,387 

$18,689 

$42,887 

13.9 

Census Tract 458, Block Group 6 

1,440 

$11,303 

$27,404 

28.3 

Census Tract 459, Block Group 1 

963 

$18,562 

$40,893 

15.3 

Census Tract 459, Block Group 2 

994 

$8,236 

$20,625 

32.9 

Census Tract 460, Block Group 1 

905 

$20,362 

$35,000 

12.0 

Census Tract 460, Block Group 2 

702 

$20,872 

$36,071 

29.1 

Imperial County 

142,361 

$13,239 

$31,870 

20.8 

Census Tract 108, Block Group 1 

608 

$15,776 

$34,219 

35.2 

Census Tract 108, Block Group 2 

877 

$22,868 

$49,844 

2.1 

Census Tract 112.01, Block Group 2 

1,030 

$10,526 

$30,667 

12.0 

Census Tract 113, Block Group 1 

870 

$12,906 

$37,625 

17.5 

Census Tract 113, Block Group 2 

1,377 

$11,021 

$30,815 

23.2 

Census Tract 113, Block Group 5 

1,404 

$12,331 

$47,083 

8.5 

Census Tract 124, Block Group 2 

637 

$13,286 

$16,389 

28.6 

Source U.S. Bureau of the Census, Census 2000a. 





A review of the block group data from the 2000 census shows that the poverty rate along the B- 
Line in La Paz County is 22.6 percent, which is higher than the county average of 19.3 percent although 
the median household income for the affected block group is higher than the county average ($27,000 
compared to $25,839). All five of the block groups within the PIR of the proposed B-Line and BEI 
Lateral in Riverside County have lower median household incomes than the overall county average and 
four of the five block groups also have higher poverty rates than the county average. In Imperial County, 
the PIR associated with the B-Line and IID Lateral would affect three block groups with lower median 
household incomes than the county average. Two of these three block groups also have higher poverty 
rates than the county average. A third block group also has a higher poverty rate than the county average 
but its median household income is above the county average. In summary, the data show that low- 
income populations are present along the proposed pipeline routes. Therefore, there is a potential for 
disproportionate adverse impacts on these low-income populations. 

4.17.5 Impact Analysis 

Not all impacts identified in this EIS/EIR are considered to affect minority or low-income 
populations. Examples of Project-related impacts that are considered impacts with potential 
environmental justice issues are described below. 

The main adverse impacts associated with construction of the proposed Project would be the 
temporary noise, dust, and traffic congestion, none of which are considered significant adverse impacts 
after mitigation. These impacts would occur along the entire pipeline routes and in areas with a variety of 
socioeconomic backgrounds. Therefore, these impacts are not considered to result in a disproportionately 
high and adverse effect or impact on minority or low-income populations. As a result, this analysis does 


4-254 






not evaluate construction-related impacts any further. Impacts associated with operation of the Project 
are described below. 

None of the proposed facilities would result in increased air emissions during operation (see 
Section 4.12.4). The pipeline facilities would be buried and would, therefore, not have an impact on 
visual resources during operation. As discussed in Section 4.8.7, construction of the new aboveground 
facilities would have a permanent impact on visual resources, and modifications at the existing 
aboveground facilities would result in an incremental increase in impacts on visual resources but would 
generally be minor because of the presence of the existing facilities. The impacts on visual resources 
associated with these facilities are considered to be less than significant and are, therefore, not considered 
to result in a disproportionately high and adverse effect or impact on minority or low-income populations. 

The long-term potential public safety impacts associated with operation of the pipelines (the 
potential for a release of natural gas from a leak or rupture of the pipelines followed by ignition and 
burning of the gas cloud) could represent an environmental justice concern. However, construction and 
operation of the proposed facilities would affect a mix of ethnic and socioeconomic areas in the Project 
area as a whole. In addition, the pipeline and aboveground facilities associated with the Project would be 
designed, constructed, operated, and maintained in accordance with or to exceed the DOT Minimum 
Federal Safety Standards in Title 49 CFR Part 192 and the California Public Utilities Commission, 
General Order 112-E. These regulations, which are intended to protect the public and to prevent natural 
gas facility accidents and failures, apply to all areas along the proposed pipeline routes regardless of the 
presence or absence of minority or low-income populations. As discussed in Section 4.14.2, none of the 
safety-related potential impacts associated with the Project are considered significant. Therefore, the 
safety-related impacts are not considered to result in a disproportionately high and adverse effect or 
impact on minority or low-income populations. 

Executive Order 12898 emphasizes the importance of providing opportunities for community 
input into the NEPA process. Similarly, the CSLC’s Environmental Justice Policy stresses 
communication and public involvement in the decision-making process. Information on the public 
notification and participation process conducted for the proposed Project is provided in Section 1.3. A 
recent Final Federal Rule, published in May 2005 for Title 49 CFR Part 192, requires the operator to 
include, in its public awareness plans, measures to prepare and distribute a comprehensive program that 
includes activities to advise affected municipalities, school districts, businesses, and residents of pipeline 
facility locations. The program must be conducted in English and in other languages commonly 
understood by a significant number and concentration of the non-English speaking population in the 
operator’s area. As discussed in Section 1.3, open houses and public scoping meetings were held in the 
Project area in July and September of 2005 to inform the public about the Project and provide an 
opportunity for the public to ask questions and express concerns. These public input opportunities were 
announced in the local newspapers in English and Spanish, and Spanish translators were present. 

4.17.6 Arrowhead Alternative 

The PIR associated with the Arrowhead Alternative would affect 16 census blocks within 
Riverside County, of which 6 are populated. Table 4.17.6-1 presents the ethnic and racial composition of 
the population in the State of California, Riverside County, and the populated census blocks affected by 
the Arrowhead Alternative. 

As shown in Table 4.17.6-1, the minority population does not exceed 50 percent in the census 
blocks affected by the Arrowhead Alternative. However, the percentage of American Indian and/or 
Alaska Native populations within the affected census blocks is appreciably higher than the county average 


4-255 


(13.6 percent versus 1.2 percent). A detailed census block analysis for this population is provided in 
Table 4.17.6-2. 


TABLE 4.17.6-1 


Summary of Racial and Ethnic Demographics within the Potential Impact Radius 
Associated with the Arrowhead Alternative 


Location 

Total 

Population 

(2000) 

Percent 

White 

(2000) 

Percent 
Black or 
African 
American 
(2000) 

Percent 
American 
Indian & 
Alaska 
Native 
(2000) 

Percent 

Asian 

(2000) 

Percent 
Native 
Hawaiian & 
Other 
Pacific 
Islander 
(2000) 

Percent 

Other 

Race 

(2000) 

Percent 
Hispanic 
or Latino - 
Any Race 
(2000) 

Percent 

Minority 

(2000) 

California 

33,871,648 

59.5 

6.7 

1.0 

10.9 

0.3 

21.6 

32.4 

40.5 

Riverside 

County 

1,545,387 

65.6 

6.2 

1.2 

3.7 

0.3 

23.0 

36.2 

34.4 

Census 
Blocks 
Affected by 
the 

Arrowhead 

Alternative 

44 

63.6 

0.0 

13.6 

0.0 

0.0 

22.7 

22.7 

36.4 


Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Census 2000a. 


TABLE 4.17.6-2 

Populated Census Blocks and American Indian or Alaska Native Populations 
within the Potential Impact Radius Associated with the Arrowhead Alternative 




Total American Indian or Percent American Indian 

Location 

Total Population 

Alaska Native Individuals 

or Alaska Native 

California 

33,871,648 

333,346 

1.0 

Riverside County 

1,545,387 

18,168 

1.2 

Census Tract 459, Block 1081 

1 

0 

0.0 

Census Tract 459, Block 1087 

18 

0 

0.0 

Census Tract 459, Block 1090 

7 

0 

0.0 

Census Tract 459, Block 1091 

5 

0 

0.0 

Census Tract 459, Block 1122 

12 

6 

50.0 

Census Tract 459, Block 1133 

Source U.S. Bureau of the Census, Census 2000a. 

1 

0 

0.0 


The census block data presented in Table 4.17.6-2 show the number and percent of the population 
that is American Indian and/or Alaska Native in the blocks affected by the Arrowhead Alternative. The 
percentage of this population in each census block is presented in comparison with county and State 
percentages. Of the six populated census blocks, only one contains persons of American Indian or Alaska 
Native descent. This census tract is also affected by the B-Line associated with the proposed Project. 

Table 4.17.6-3 presents the income distribution associated with the Arrowhead Alternative. The 
block group affected by the Arrowhead Alternative is also affected by the proposed B-Line. The affected 
block group has a lower median household income than the county average and a higher rate of poverty 
than the county average. 


4-256 










TABLE 4.17.6-3 


Income Distribution within the Potential Impact Radius Associated with the Arrowhead Alternative 


Location 

Total Population 
(2000) 

Per Capita Income 
(1999) 

Median Household 
Income (1999) 

Percentage Below 
Poverty (1999) 

California 

33,871,648 

$22,711 

$47,493 

13.9 

Riverside County 

1,545,387 

$18,689 

$42,887 

13.9 

Census Tract 459, Block Group 1 

963 

$18,562 

$40,893 

15.3 


Source U.S. Bureau of the Census, Census 2000a. 


The data show that both minority and low-income populations exist along the Arrowhead 
Alternative; however, these populations are also affected by the B-Line associated with the proposed 
Project. Therefore, the Arrowhead Alternative would not affect new or different minority or low-income 
populations were it to be adopted. Impacts on these populations would be the same as those described in 
Section 4.17.5. 

4.17.7 No Project Alternative 

Under the No Project Alternative, the FERC would deny North Baja’s application for a 
Certificate and a Presidential Permit amendment, the CSLC would deny North Baja’s application for an 
amendment to its right-of-way lease across California’s Sovereign and School Lands, and the BLM would 
deny North Baja’s application to amend its existing Right-of-Way Grant and obtain a Temporary Use 
Permit for the portion of the Project on Federal lands. The No Project Alternative means that the Project 
would not go forward and the Project-related facilities would not be installed. Accordingly, none of the 
potential environmental impacts identified for the construction and operation of the proposed Project 
would occur. 

Because the proposed Project is privately funded, it is unknown whether North Baja would fund 
another energy project in California. However, should the No Project Alternative be selected, the energy 
needs identified in Section 1.1 would likely be addressed through other means, such as through other 
LNG or natural gas-related pipeline projects. Such projects may result in potential environmental impacts 
of the nature and magnitude of the proposed Project as well as impacts particular to their respective 
configurations and operations; however, these impacts cannot be predicted with any certainty at this time. 


4-257 














































































































































CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 










































































5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 


5.1 SUMMARY OF THE STAFFS’ ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 

The Agency Staffs have determined that construction and operation of the North Baja Pipeline 
Expansion Project would result in adverse environmental impacts. These impacts would be most 
significant during the period of construction. This determination is based on a review of the information 
provided by North Baja and further developed from data requests; field investigations; scoping; literature 
research; alternatives analysis; and contacts with Federal, State, and local agencies, and individual 
members of the public. The Agency Staffs have concluded that if the Project is constructed and operated 
in accordance with applicable laws and regulations, North Baja’s proposed mitigation, and the Agency 
Staffs’ additional mitigation recommendations, it would be an environmentally acceptable action. 
Although many factors were considered in this determination, the principal reasons are: 

• 99 percent of the proposed pipeline facilities would be constructed in or adjacent to 
various existing rights-of-way; 

• no new permanent right-of-way would be required for the B-line, and the permanent 
right-of-way for the IID Lateral would be limited to a maximum width of 30 feet; 

• North Baja would implement its CM&R Plan, SPCC Plan, HDD Plan, Traffic 
Management Plans, Blasting Specifications, PRMM Plan, Dust Control Plan, Fire 
Prevention and Suppression Plan, Site-specific Residential Construction Mitigation Plans, 
OHV Plan, and Unanticipated Discovery Plan for Cultural Resources to protect natural 
resources and residential areas during construction and operation of the Project; 

• use of the HDD method would avoid disturbances to the beds and banks of the Colorado 
River, the All-American Canal, and the East Highline Canal and associated 
wetlands/riparian areas; 

• the appropriate consultations with the FWS, the CDFG, the SHPOs, and Native American 
tribes, and any appropriate compliance actions resulting from these consultations, would 
be completed before North Baja would be allowed to begin construction in any given 
area; and 

• an environmental inspection and MMP would ensure compliance with all mitigation 
measures that become conditions of certification or approval. 

In addition, the Agency Staffs developed specific mitigation measures to further reduce the 
environmental impact that would otherwise result from construction of the Project. The FERC and CSLC 
staffs are recommending that these mitigation measures be attached as conditions to any authorizations 
issued by the FERC or the CSLC. These mitigation measures are presented in Section 5.6. The BLM 
will present, in its Records of Decision for the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project, its own 
recommendations that incorporate the concurrence or non-concurrence of the BOR and the FWS. 

Table 5.1-1 presents a summary of the Project’s potential environmental impacts and the 
mitigation measures identified to avoid or reduce each impact. The impacts are classified before and after 
mitigation. Table 5.1-1 also lists the agency(ies) responsible for monitoring each of the mitigation 
requirements. With a few exceptions, discussed in Section 5.4, North Baja’s proposed and/or the Agency 
Staffs’ recommended mitigation would reduce potential environmental impacts to less than significant 


5-1 



levels. Table 5.1-1 is the basis for the MMP that would be implemented during construction and 
operation of the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project. 

5.2 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 

The No Project Alternative was considered. The Agency Staffs concluded that while the No 
Project Alternative would eliminate the environmental impacts identified in this EIS/EIR, North Baja 
would not be able to provide transportation for LNG-source natural gas from the Mexican pipeline system 
into the United States to meet the demand for natural gas in California and other southwestern U.S. 
markets. This means customers in the southwestern United States would likely have fewer and 
potentially more expensive options for obtaining natural gas supplies in the near future. This might lead 
to alternative proposals to develop natural gas delivery or storage infrastructure, reduced use of natural 
gas, and/or the use of other sources of energy. 

It is possible that the infrastructure currently supplying natural gas to the proposed market area 
could be developed in other ways unforeseen at this point. This might include constructing or expanding 
regional pipelines as well as LNG import and storage systems. Any construction or expansion work 
would result in specific environmental impacts that could be less than, similar to, or greater than those 
associated with the proposed Project. Increased costs could potentially result in customers conserving or 
reducing use of natural gas. Although it is possible that additional conservation may have some effect on 
the demand for natural gas, the level of conservation efforts, as described in the CEC’s 2005 Integrated 
Energy Policy Report (CEC 2005a), is not expected to significantly reduce the long-term requirements for 
natural gas or effectively exert downward pressures on gas prices. 

Denying North Baja’s applications could force potential natural gas customers to seek regulatory 
approval to use other forms of energy. California regulators are promoting renewable energy programs to 
help reduce the demand for fossil fuels. While renewable energy programs can contribute as an energy 
source for electricity, they cannot at this time reliably replace the need for natural gas or provide 
sufficient energy to keep pace with demand. 

Alternatives involving the use of other existing or proposed LNG or natural gas facilities to meet 
the stated objectives of the proposed Project were evaluated. None of these system alternatives could 
meet the Project objectives within the time frame of the proposed Project. Furthermore, each of the 
system alternatives could result in its own set of significant environmental impacts that could be greater 
than those associated with the proposed Project. 

The B-Line deviates from a designated utility corridor on BLM land at five locations in the 
CDCA. As part of the EIS/EIR for the A-Line, the alternative of following designated utility corridors 
was considered. Based on the analysis conducted for that project, the route selected for the A-Line, 
including the deviations from designated utility corridors and the crossing of the Milpitas Wash SMA, 
was determined to be environmentally preferable to a route that remained within designated utility 
corridors. The proposed B-Line would be adjacent to the existing A-Line for the entire route. The 
collocation of facilities is generally preferred by land management agencies, land use planners, and other 
regulatory agencies and has several inherent engineering and environmental advantages. Perhaps the 
most important of these advantages is that new land disturbance is minimized. Because of the advantages 
of collocation, and because the route selected for the A-Line that would be followed for the B-Line was 
previously determined to be environmentally preferable to a route that remains within a designated utility 
corridor, alternatives for the B-Line route that would follow designated utility corridors were not 
considered. The Agency Staffs evaluated one route alternative (22 nd Avenue Alternative) in comparison 
with the corresponding segment of the proposed B-Line. The 22 nd Avenue Alternative would avoid 18 th 
Avenue. The 22 nd Avenue Alternative was eliminated because it would merely transfer impacts from one 


5-2 


or more property owners or communities to another without conferring obvious environmental 
advantages. 

Seven route alternatives were evaluated in comparison with the corresponding segment of the 
proposed IID Lateral. Along the IID Lateral, North Baja proposes to deviate from a designated utility 
corridor at three locations within the CDCA. Two alternatives (Corridor L and Bonds Comer 
Alternatives) were evaluated to stay within a designated utility corridor for a longer distance than the 
proposed route. Four alternatives (CalTrans, ISDRA North, ISDRA Transmission Line, and ISDRA 
Grays Well Road Alternatives) were identified to avoid potential conflicts of the IID Lateral with existing 
and planned recreational use in the ISDRA. One alternative (Gasoducto Bajanorte Pipeline Route 
Alternative) would connect directly from the Gasoducto Bajanorte pipeline west of Mexicali to the IID’s 
El Centro Generating Station. All of the IID Lateral alternatives were eliminated because they would not 
be environmentally preferable to the corresponding segment of the IID Lateral, would be infeasible, or 
would not meet the Project objectives. 

Four route variations (East Mesa Route Variation and Imperial Valley Route Variations A, B, and 
C) in comparison with the corresponding segment of the proposed IID Lateral were evaluated to avoid 
potential conflicts with other projects or address scoping comments. These route variations were 
eliminated because they would not be environmentally preferable to the corresponding segment of the IID 
Lateral, would be infeasible, or would merely transfer impacts from one or more property owners or 
communities to another without conferring obvious environmental advantages. 

An alternative to the proposed delivery points to the SoCal Gas system and Blythe Energy 
Facility I supply pipeline along Riviera Drive was considered. This alternative, referred to as the 
Arrowhead Alternative, would deliver natural gas to the SoCal Gas system at SoCal Gas’ existing Blythe 
Compressor Station at the intersection of 14 th Avenue and Arrowhead Boulevard in Riverside County. 
This alternative would add 2.1 miles of 36-inch-diameter pipeline; a new meter station; a pig launcher and 
receiver; and ancillary taps, piping, and aboveground facilities. The Arrowhead Alternative would 
eliminate the proposed Blythe Meter Station at Riviera Drive, the SoCal Gas Interconnect at the Blythe 
Meter Station, the 0.6-mile-long BEI Lateral, and the odorant facility at the Ogilby Meter Station. The 
Arrowhead Alternative would modify a small portion of the proposed Project by essentially exchanging 
certain aboveground facilities and short segments of pipeline. Because North Baja’s negotiations with 
SoCal Gas regarding the delivery point to its system are still in progress, the Agency Staffs consider the 
Arrowhead Alternative to be a reasonable alternative and have analyzed it in the applicable resource 
discussions in Section 4. 

The Agency Staffs evaluated the alternatives of installing the odorant facility at the proposed 
Blythe Meter Station site or constructing the facility on a new site at a different location. Construction of 
the odorant facility on the proposed Blythe Meter Station site would require an expansion of that site and 
would place the facility in a residential area. Construction of the odorant facility at a different location 
would require disturbance of previously undisturbed land and the construction of additional pipeline 
facilities to connect it to the proposed pipeline. The alternatives of creating a new industrial site or 
installing the odorant facility in a residential area on an expanded Blythe Meter Station site would not be 
environmentally preferable to the proposed Project and were eliminated from further consideration. 

5.3 ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE 

The State CEQA Guidelines (section 15126.6(d)) require that an EIR include sufficient 
information about each alternative to allow meaningful evaluation, analysis, and comparison with the 
proposed Project. An analysis of the Arrowhead Alternative and the No Project Alternative in 
comparison with the proposed Project is included in the major resource topics in Section 4. Based on the 


5-3 


analysis in this EIS/EIR, the No Project Alternative would eliminate the environmental impacts associated 
with the proposed Project and, therefore, is the environmentally superior alternative. However, as 
discussed above, under the No Project Alternative North Baja would not be able to provide transportation 
for LNG-source natural gas from the Mexican pipeline system into the United States to meet the growing 
demand for natural gas in California and other southwestern U.S. markets. 

Section 15126.6(e)(2) of the State CEQA Guidelines provides, in part, “If the environmentally 
superior alternative is the “No Project Alternative,” the EIR shall also identify an environmentally 
superior alternative among the other alternatives.” The Arrowhead Alternative would modify only a 
small portion of the proposed Project essentially by exchanging certain facilities; therefore, it is 
considered an alternative segment of the proposed Project rather than an alternative to the overall Project. 
Because the draft EIS/EIR identifies only the “No Project Alternative” as an alternative to the proposed 
Project, there is no obligation to identify an environmentally superior alternative as provided in section 
15126.6(e)(2). 

5.4 SIGNIFICANT UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS/STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING 
CONSIDERATIONS 

Effects on all resources were evaluated to determine any significant impact that would remain so 
after mitigation. As shown in Table 5.1-1, most environmental impacts would be reduced to less than 
significant levels by North Baja’s proposed and/or the Agency Staffs’ recommended mitigation. The 
Agency Staffs have determined that the Project is likely to adversely affect the Peirson’s milk-vetch and 
the desert tortoise and its designated critical habitat. The Agency Staffs also believe that impacts on the 
flat-tailed homed lizard and its habitat would be considered significant. As such, impacts on these three 
species would be considered significant. Approval of the Project would be subject to a Statement of 
Overriding Considerations under the CEQA due to these significant unavoidable impacts that could 
remain after all available or feasible mitigation is applied. 

5.5 IRREVERSIBLE/IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENT OF RESOURCES; SHORT- AND 
LONG-TERM USES OF THE ENVIRONMENT 

The major nonrenewable resources that would be consumed by the proposed Project are fossil 
fuels used to power constmction vehicles and, over the life of the Project, the pipelines. Theoretically, 
the pipeline components could be reclaimed at the end of the pipelines’ operational life. However, there 
would be a number of irretrievable resources committed to the proposal if the necessary authorizations are 
granted. The primary resources irretrievably lost would include: 

• soils (water and wind erosion could occur in disturbed areas); 

• crop production (lost or reduced for one season); 

• special status species (mortalities could occur during constmction, additionally, the 
Agency Staffs have determined that the Project is likely to adversely affect the desert 
tortoise and its designated habitat and the Peirson’s milk-vetch, and significantly impact 
the flat-tailed horned lizard and its habitat); 

• wildlife habitat (constmction activities would result in the long-term loss of native desert 
habitats); 

• land use (aboveground facilities and permanent access roads would replace native desert 
vegetation and urban/ruderal vegetation communities for the life of the Project); and 


5-4 


visual resources (the presence of aboveground facilities would permanently affect 
viewsheds). 




The Agency Staffs have concluded that the proposed Project would result in limited unmitigated 
adverse environmental impacts. While the losses described above would occur, the majority would be 
minimized and compensated for by North Baja’s mitigation plans and the Agency Staffs’ 
recommendations. For these reasons, the Agency Staffs consider the irreversible and irretrievable 
resource commitments to be acceptable. 

5.6 FERC AND CSLC STAFFS’ RECOMMENDED MITIGATION 

If the FERC and the CSLC approve the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project, the FERC and 
CSLC staffs recommend that the following measures be included as specific conditions of their respective 
Commission’s authorizations to further mitigate the environmental impact associated with the 
construction and operation of the Project: 

1. North Baja Pipeline, LLC (North Baja) shall follow the construction procedures and mitigation 
measures described in its applications, supplemental filings (including responses to staff data 
requests), and as identified in the environmental impact statement/environmental impact report 
(EIS/EIR), unless modified by the FERC Order. North Baja must: 

a. request any modification to these procedures, measures, or conditions in a filing with the 
Secretary of the Commission (Secretary) and the California State Lands Commission 
(CSLC); 

b. justify each modification relative to site-specific conditions; 

c. explain how that modification provides an equal or greater level of environmental 
protection than the original measure; and 

d. receive approval in writing from the Director of the Office of Energy Projects (OEP) and, 
for the lands under the CSLC’s jurisdiction, the Executive Officer of the CSLC before 
using that modification. 

2. The Director of OEP has delegation authority to take whatever steps are necessary to ensure the 
protection of all environmental resources during construction and operation of the Project. This 
authority shall allow: 

a. the modification of conditions of the FERC Order; and 

b. the design and implementation of any additional measures deemed necessary (including 
stop work authority) to assure continued compliance with the intent of the environmental 
conditions as well as the avoidance or mitigation of adverse environmental impact 
resulting from Project construction and operation. 

3. Prior to any construction, North Baja shall file an affirmative statement with the Secretary, 
certified by a senior company official, that all company personnel, environmental inspectors 
(Els), and contractor personnel will be informed of the El’s authority and have been or will be 
trained on the implementation of the environmental mitigation measures appropriate to their jobs 
before becoming involved with construction and restoration activities. 

4. The authorized facility locations shall be as shown in the EIS/EIR, as supplemented by filed 
alignment sheets, and shall include the staffs recommended facility locations, if any. As soon as 
they are available, and before the start of construction. North Baja shall file with the 
Secretary revised detailed survey alignment maps/sheets at a scale not smaller than 1:6,000 with 


5-5 



station positions for all facilities approved by the FERC Order. All requests for modifications of 
environmental conditions of the FERC Order or site-specific clearances must be written and must 
reference locations designated on these alignment maps/sheets. 

North Baja’s exercise of eminent domain authority granted under Natural Gas Act (NGA) section 
7(h) in any condemnation proceedings related to the FERC Order must be consistent with these 
authorized facilities and locations. North Baja’s right of eminent domain granted under NGA 
section 7(h) does not authorize it to increase the size of its natural gas pipelines to accommodate 
future needs or to acquire a right-of-way for a pipeline to transport a commodity other than 
natural gas. 

5. North Baja shall file with the Secretary detailed alignment maps/sheets and aerial photographs at 
a scale not smaller than 1:6,000 identifying all route realignments or facility relocations, and 
staging areas, pipe storage yards, new access roads, and other areas that would be used or 
disturbed and have not been previously identified in filings with the Secretary. Approval for each 
of these areas must be explicitly requested in writing. For each area, the request must include a 
description of the existing land use/cover type, documentation of landowner approval, whether 
any cultural resources or federally listed threatened or endangered species would be affected, and 
whether any other environmentally sensitive areas are within or abutting the area. All areas shall 
be clearly identified on the maps/sheets/aerial photographs. Each area must be approved in 
writing by the Director of OEP before construction in or near that area. 

This requirement does not apply to extra workspace allowed by North Baja’s authorized 
Construction Mitigation and Restoration Plan (CM&R Plan) or minor field realignments per 
landowner needs and requirements that do not affect other landowners or sensitive environmental 
areas such as wetlands. 

Examples of alterations requiring approval include all route realignments and facility location 
changes resulting from: 

a. implementation of cultural resources mitigation measures; 

b. implementation of endangered, threatened, or special concern species mitigation 
measures; 

c. recommendations by State regulatory authorities; and 

d. agreements with individual landowners that affect other landowners or could affect 
sensitive environmental areas. 

6. North Baja shall file with the CSLC for the review and approval of the Executive Officer, a set of 
final engineering design drawings as issued for construction for the entire Project in California, 
certified by a California-registered civil/structural engineer. In addition to the pipeline 
alignments and profiles, the drawings shall provide information such as tie-in details, pipeline 
grade and material specifications, wall thickness, weight and corrosion coating, minimum bend 
radius (wherever applicable, such as horizontal directional drill [HDD] installations), normal and 
maximum operating pressure, hydrostatic test information, cathodic protection and test stations, 
and location and details of the nearest upstream pipeline flow emergency shutdown equipment, 
etc. 

7. At least 60 days before the anticipated start of construction, North Baja shall file an initial 
Implementation Plan with the Secretary and the CSLC for the review and written approval of the 
Director of OEP and the Executive Officer of the CSLC describing how North Baja will 
implement the mitigation measures required by the FERC Order and the CSLC mitigation 


5-6 


monitoring program. North Baja must file revisions to the plan as schedules change. The plan 
shall identify: 

a. how North Baja will incorporate these requirements into the contract bid documents, 
construction contracts (especially penalty clauses and specifications), and construction 
drawings so that the mitigation required at each site is clear to onsite construction and 
inspection personnel; 

b. the number of Els assigned per spread and how North Baja will ensure that sufficient 
personnel are available to implement the environmental mitigation; 

c. company personnel, including Els and contractors, who will receive copies of the 
appropriate materials; 

d. what training and instructions North Baja will give to all personnel involved with 
construction and restoration (initial and refresher training as the Project progresses and 
personnel change), with the opportunity for OEP staff to participate in the training 
session(s); 

e. the company personnel (if known) and specific portion of North Baja's organization 
having responsibility for compliance; 

f. the procedures (including use of contract penalties) North Baja will follow if 
noncompliance occurs; and 

g. for each discrete facility, a Gantt or PERT chart (or similar project scheduling diagram), 
and dates for: 

i. the completion of all required surveys and reports; 

ii. the mitigation training of onsite personnel; 

iii. the start of construction; and 

iv. the start and completion of restoration. 

8. North Baja shall file updated status reports with the Secretary and the CSLC on a biweekly basis 
until all construction-related activities, including restoration, are complete. These status reports 
shall also be provided to other Federal and State agencies with permitting responsibilities upon 
request. Status reports shall include: 

a. the current construction status of each spread, work planned for the following reporting 
period, and any schedule changes for stream crossings or work in other environmentally 
sensitive areas; 

b. a listing of all problems encountered and each instance of noncompliance observed by the 
EI(s) or the third-party compliance monitors during the reporting period (both for the 
conditions imposed by the FERC and any environmental conditions/permit requirements 
imposed by other Federal, State, or local agencies); 

c. corrective actions implemented in response to all instances of noncompliance, and their 
cost; 

d. the effectiveness of all corrective actions implemented; 

e. a description of any landowner/resident complaints that may relate to compliance with 
the requirements of the FERC Order and the CSLC mitigation monitoring program, and 
the measures taken to satisfy their concerns; and 

f. copies of any correspondence received by North Baja from other Federal, State, or local 
permitting agencies concerning instances of noncompliance, and North Baja’s response. 

9. North Baja must receive written authorization from the Director of OEP before commencing 
service for each component of the Project. Such authorization will only be granted following a 
determination that rehabilitation and restoration of the right-of-way are proceeding satisfactorily. 


5-7 


10. Within 30 days of placing the certificated facilities in service, North Baja shall file an 
affirmative statement with the Secretary, certified by a senior company official: 

a. that the facilities have been constructed in compliance with all applicable conditions, and 
that continuing activities will be consistent with all applicable conditions; or 

b. identifying which of the Certificate conditions North Baja has complied with or will 
comply with. This statement shall also identify any areas along the right-of-way where 
compliance measures were not properly implemented, if not previously identified in filed 
status reports, and the reason for noncompliance. 

11. North Baja shall consult with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to identify areas where 
compaction may have occurred during construction of the A-Line and revise its CM&R Plan to 
list these locations. The revised CM&R Plan shall incorporate provisions for limited testing for 
compaction along the B-Line and the Imperial Irrigation District (IID) Lateral, list the specific 
types of soils that would be tested, and describe specific measures to alleviate compaction if 
compaction is identified. North Baja shall file the revised CM&R Plan with the FERC and the 
CSLC for the review and written approval of the Director of the OEP and the Executive Officer 
of the CSLC before construction. 

12. North Baja shall prepare a revised HDD Plan that specifies the corrective action and cleanup 
procedures that would be followed in the event a frac-out occurs in the water during an HDD 
operation. North Baja shall file the revised plan with the FERC and the CSLC for the review and 
written approval of the Director of OEP and the Executive Officer of the CSLC before 
construction. 

13. North Baja shall consult with the BLM and prepare a revised Dust Control Plan that specifies the 
sources of water that would be used for dust control, the anticipated quantities of water that 
would be required, and measures to prevent fish and fish egg entrainment during dust control 
water withdrawals. North Baja shall file the revised plan and documentation of BLM approval of 
the plan with the FERC and the CSLC for the review and written approval of the Director of OEP 
and the Executive Officer of the CSLC before construction. 

14. North Baja shall consult with the BLM and revise its CM&R Plan to incorporate the BLM’s weed 
control requirements. The revised CM&R Plan shall also include a plan for weed wash stations 
to be established along the construction right-of-way to clean all equipment after working in 
weed-infested areas prior to entering non-weed-infested areas. The specific locations of the weed 
wash stations shall be identified by the El. If following clearing, the topsoil in weed-infested 
areas is segregated from the entire construction area, further equipment washing would not be 
necessary until topsoil restoration is conducted. The plan shall indicate the methods proposed for 
equipment washing (e.g., high pressure water or compressed air) and measures to prevent wash 
water (if used) from affecting non-weed-infested areas. North Baja shall file the revised CM&R 
Plan and documentation of BLM approval of the plan with the FERC and the CSLC for the 
review and written approval of the Director of OEP and the Executive Officer of the CSLC 
before construction. 

15. North Baja shall, in consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), the BLM, and 
the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), develop a Preclearing Plan to protect 
migratory bird species during construction that includes specific details of the preclearing 
methods to be implemented, the specific locations where preclearing would occur, and the dates 
preclearing would be initiated and completed for each phase of construction. North Baja shall file 


5-8 


the plan and documentation of FWS, BLM, and CDFG approval of the plan with the FERC and 
the CSLC for the review and written approval of the Director of OEP and the Executive Officer 
of the CSLC before construction. 

16. North Baja shall restrict stringing trucks to a 10-mile-per-hour speed limit between mileposts 48.0 
and 68.0 on the B-Line. 

17. North Baja shall implement the following measures at the Colorado River during activities 
associated with the HDD: 

a. all individuals working within or adjacent to southwestern willow flycatcher habitat 
would be required to complete southwestern willow flycatcher training prior to working 
within the construction right-of-way in those areas; 

b. if night-time operations are required for the pullback of the pipe through the drilled hole 
under the river, all work shall be conducted behind abatement walls that control noise and 
light emissions. Abatement walls are to be installed before construction, regardless of 
the time of start of construction; 

c. no night lighting shall be used within 1,000 feet of potential habitat adjacent to the river 
during the breeding season that could be visible at the edge of the habitat; 

d. construction-related pedestrian access is to be restricted in riparian habitat during the 
breeding season except in the case of emergency frac-out response and to monitor the 
location of the drill head; and 

e. dust is to be strictly controlled by watering construction areas within 1,000 feet of 
potential habitat at the Colorado River. 

18. North Baja shall implement the following measures to minimize impact on the Yuma clapper rail 
unless North Baja provides documentation from the FWS and the CDFG that such measures are 
not necessary or if site-specific surveys fail to identify individuals at the Alamo River or Rannells 
Drain: 

a. ensure vegetation at the proposed crossing location of Rannells Drain, extending 150 feet 
on either side of the proposed construction work area, is cleared before February 1, 
2009; 

b. ensure vegetation at the proposed crossing location of the Alamo River is cleared before 
February 1, 2009; and 

c. conduct all activities at Rannells Drain and the Alamo River between the hours of 8:30 
AM and 3:30 PM to avoid periods of peak Yuma clapper rail vocalizations. 

19. North Baja shall conduct surveys for Gila woodpeckers in areas of suitable nesting habitat before 
initiation of construction of the B-Line. If active Gila woodpecker nest cavities are identified 
during preconstruction surveys, North Baja shall monitor cavities during construction to 
determine if nesting individuals are being disturbed by construction activities. If disturbance 
(e.g., avoidance of cavity by individuals) is noted and young are present in the cavity, North Baja 
shall cease construction in the area until young have fledged from the nest cavity. 

20. For those areas where construction would occur more than 1 year from the date of issuance of the 
FERC and CSLC approvals for the Project, North Baja shall consult with the FWS, the BLM, and 
the CDFG to update the species list and to verify that previous consultations and determinations 
of effect are still current. Documentation of these consultations, and the need for additional 
surveys and survey reports (if required), and FWS, BLM, and CDFG comments on the surveys 


5-9 


and survey reports and their conclusions (as applicable), shall be filed with the FERC and the 
CSLC before construction. 

21. North Baja shall not begin construction activities until: 

a. the FERC completes section 7 consultation with the FWS; 

b. the CDFG makes a consistency determination on the FWS’ Biological Opinion pursuant 
to section 2080.1 of the California Fish and Game Code or issues an Incidental Take 
Permit that covers both federally and State-listed species that may be affected; 

c. North Baja obtains an Incidental Take Permit under section 2081 of the California Fish 
and Game Code for all State-listed species that may be affected, or receives concurrence 
from the CDFG that an Incidental Take Permit is not required; 

d. North Baja has completed and filed with the FERC and the CSLC the results of 
consultations with the BLM regarding measures to avoid or minimize impacts on special 
status species on lands managed by the BLM; and 

e. North Baja has received written notification from the Director of OEP and the Executive 
Officer of the CSLC that construction or use of conservation measures may begin. 

22. North Baja shall defer implementation of any treatment plans/mitigation measures (including 
archaeological data recovery), construction of facilities, and use of all staging, storage, or 
temporary work areas and new or to-be-improved access roads until: 

a. North Baja files the California State Historic Preservation Office’s (SHPO’s) comments 
on Addendum Report 2 and the Evaluation Plan; 

b. North Baja provides Addendum Report 3 to the BLM, and files any BLM and Bureau of 
Reclamation (BOR) comments on Addendum Report 3 and the Evaluation Plan, as 
appropriate; 

c. North Baja files any FWS, Cibola National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) comments on the 
Overview and Survey Report and the Evaluation Plan; 

d. North Baja files with the FERC and the CSLC (for the California portion of the Project), 
as well as the SHPO(s); the BLM; the BOR; and the FWS, Cibola NWR, as appropriate, 
all additional cultural resources survey reports for denied access areas and any additional 
areas requiring survey, evaluation reports, and any necessary treatment plans; 

e. North Baja files the comments of the SHPO(s); the BLM; the BOR; and the FWS, Cibola 
NWR, as appropriate, on all additional cultural resources survey reports and plans; 

f. the CSLC reviews and approves all cultural resources reports and plans prepared for the 
California portion of the Project and notifies North Baja in writing that construction may 
proceed; 

g. the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation is afforded an opportunity to comment, if 
historic properties would be adversely affected; and 

h. the Director of OEP notifies North Baja in writing that treatment plans/mitigation 
measures may be implemented or construction may proceed. 

All material filed with the FERC containing location, character, and ownership information 
about cultural resources must have the cover and any relevant pages therein clearly labeled in 
bold lettering: “CONTAINS PRIVILEGED INFORMATION - DO NOT RELEASE.’’ 


5-10 


23. North Baja shall file a revised Dust Control Plan with the FERC and the CSLC for the review and 

written approval of the Director of OEP and the Executive Officer of the CSLC before 

construction. The revised plan shall specify the following: 

a. the precautions that would be taken to minimize fugitive dust emissions from 
construction activities; 

b. the measures that would be taken to limit visible density (opacity) of emissions to less 
than or equal to 20 percent; 

c. the individuals with authority to determine if/when water needs to be reapplied for dust 
control; 

d. the individuals with authority to stop work if the contractor does not comply with dust 
control measures; 

e. the speed limit that would be required on unpaved roads and unpaved haul and access 
roads; 

f. how visual density would be measured to determine that it is less than or equal to 20 
percent; and 

g. how compliance with the 20 percent visual density requirement would be recorded. 


5-11 


in 

LD 

_1 

CQ 

< 

I- 


C 

o 

‘55 

c 

(0 

a 

x 

UJ 

0) 

c 

a> 

a 


a 

•« 

CD 

•C 


0 

■C 


E 

co 

w 

05 

o 


o> 

c 


(0 

05 


05 = 

E -Q 

|s 

o ©- 
2 0 
2 0) 
CC 


05 

C o 
<a 
05 C 
© O 
c = 
CO CO 
O 05 

§5^ 

co 


CO 

05 


05 

l_ 

O 

0 

“ c 
8 .2 
E to 
8 f 

c i 

05 

CO 


o 

CO 

Q. 

E 


c « 
o >- 

= 05 
CO X3 

•2> E 

■— D 

2 z 


c ® 

O CO 

'0 55 
co Ui 

11 
>* E Jr 
05 O o 

05 ° i 

c ^3 
- 

2 2 o 

05 3 DC 

"S S»S 

LL DC hb 


3 

CO t; 
05 C 
05 


« m 

il 

O 03 

w O ^ c- 
"o —i "o LE 

CM C J 

03 o 03 CD 


E 

05 

05 

CO 

c 

ca 


< 

0 

HI 

O 

| S = 

£ O — 

0 Z 0 
8 & 2 
J wO 


05 

05 

2 C 
o i o 

- 1 -O 3 
CD TJ -K 


J s 

2 co 


CO 


3 2 
O Q. 

,™ c ^ 
CO O 05 
CD C5 j= 

- ° O 


: xr 2 

J S' 05 
* 03 — 

- 9* co 
5 §. -2 

too 


cd 


co 

8 © 


5 

Q. 


CO 
CO CO 


05 


o 2 co 
c § 2 
.2 > ° 
05 


Q_ 2, 

E os 

O m 
© JZ 

>- tr 
05 o 


X3 TO 
C C 


o 

o 


< 

0 

■= UJ 

2 o 
3 2 I © 

Cfl C t< c 
O - C — 

e£ 2 |co 

05 ® '> 8 0 

0 ) O O 


CO 

v_ 

D 

f5 

C 

a) 


O) ~0 Cl) 


CD 


£ os S' 

2 §| 

8 « 0 


g c To 
co 9--o 
-o 5 c 
E 05 co 
2 o 
.2 a- 0 
OS J 


3 

T3 CD 
w- C 

3 '■© 

o 2 
o co 

9 -O 

3 CC 
O <0 

° 05 CO 

co c 8 
2 Z - 

= g:l 


Ql 

CD 

Z 


CD 

TO 

C 

CO 

d 

_i 

CO 

o 

d 

DC 

UJ 


< 

O 

UJ 

O 

jjl = 

£ a — 
»f M 

© 05 2 

_J 0 O 


>s 05 


E 

o 

o 

o 


>> _ 
■*- c 

Q. 05 
05 o 
© CL 

og 

z § 

11 
r, os 

V, % 
ca 5 

■° o 

05 ^ 
CO O 
3 3 

g § 
§ O 

CO ® 
'co 2 
03 a) 
x: .E 
tr > 
o to 

7 05 


T3 

05 

O CO 
3 C 
TO O 
c '-5 
o 03 
O .© 


05 

c 

O — 
to X3 O 


= 8 '© XT 

CO ^ ® -5 
— TO CL g 

3 CO 


C 

o 

o 

"O <D 

Ss 

05-^ 

S*| 


o 

8 ^ 

5 ® 

co co 


§ O) 

5 c 

W 05 
05 2 
CD 

> CD C 5 c 

I -2 " = 

co .ca __ 

®5 2 ~ 

.E m 
to £ 
co ^ 


05 05 

-q *: 


05 

E 
c 
o 

L_ 

3 > 

11 
03 03 

CD . . 
>> 


CD 


co 5 

05 05 
O O 

II 

II 

co 8 

L_ 

3 o 

3 J= 
O CO 


2 c co 

3 o w 

> CO co" 

5—05 
CO 2 > 

£ ©8 
3^-2 

^ * g- 

05 


CO 

o 

o 


Q. TO ^ 

a>S? 

.E - Q. 
to 2 M 
2 2 8 
CD CD — 


< 

0 

UJ 

o 


c 

CO 

2 — 
it= co 
c co 

a >2 

CO O 


co 

o 

^ Q. 
C' 05 
CO = 
CO E 
CO ^ 

8 « 
CD ^ 
C c 


0 ^ 
JD .E 

“7* 

^ CD 


O 
0 ) 
o 
<D 
CD St 
X5 ® 

ca 


>N 

co 

E 


i 

>, 


>. 

jQ 


05 u i 
05X: 03 
C CNJ 
= 05 ^ 
» c Q. 
JO O 
CD 


o 

CL 

E 

CO CD 
05 h- 

c 

CO -O 
05 Q5 

3 O 


to e® 


CO 


co ^ 

CO T3 

3 CO 

o x: 

8 CD TO 

E -o o 

2 D 2 
2 •£ c 

c o 3 
° ° >. 

c ® ^ 

3 <D 

|g| 

X5 Jr Q. 


CO 

CL 

CD 

Z 


TO 

05 

t— 

3 

cr 

CD 

k_ 

05 

c 


c 

o 

E 

o 


0 

UJ 

o 

|i = 

£ o — 

8 c® 
8 & 2 
_j m O 


c 

o 

co ca 
cd e 

£ S 

o ® 

co n- 
05 u- 


05 

v ]5 

?1 
>. ca 
c 


r a L CD 


05 

O 

C 

05 

CO 

CD ___ 
Q. C 
CD 


^ O O *3 > - 


CO 

k_ 3 
O CO 
C 0 

fa 

> 0 
co >, 

5 ° 

0 C 

CO X3 
CO 

2 § 
« § 
O 0 
c -0 
p CD 

1# 
5 o 

w z 

0 

.E co 

II 

Q. 0 
0 0 
XI CL 

I— o 


0 O 

o X 

b® 
0 — 


X5 

■o 

0 

O 

© 

3= 

0 

0 

X5 

o 

c 


—I sz 


c 

o 

o 

3 

w_ 

*55 

c 

o 

o 

CD 

o 

o 

JD 


rr ° 

CC co 
CO -Q 
cc O £ 

ill 

° cr; 
a: — ® 


CD _ 
0 o ~ 
0 m 2 

® -o 2 3 
9- C M- 0 

° 0 o ^5 
DC >. E 

m 1 1 | 

XI s — hL .tr 

_ tr CD Q- 3 

g ^0)0 ^ 

o g *5 £ 3 

^ crCC o *o 


3 

O 

c 

o 

CO 

c 

03 

CL 

X 

0 

0 

k_ 

_3 

3 

CO 

0 


0 ® 
05 — 
C 0 

‘^.2 
E Q. 

2 © 
32 


< 

0 

UJ 

O 


|S = 

x: o — 
E = ® 
8 'E ® 
8 ra 2 
_j w O 


0 

£ 

0 

> 

0 

XI 

CO 

o 

0 

*o 

k_ 

CL 


0 o3 
JC 

*- 0 
(— 
o .= 

© e 


2 0 


O c 

•4—* 

_ O 

• 8 -G 

C 3 
0 T3 

O P 


0 
05 S 

E o 
o « 

■C C 

to 2 

2 o 
!r o 
^•o 
■° o 

0 Q. 
CD 

2 0 


0 C 

x: o 

0 

° - s 

V O <0 
>< Q. 


0 CD 

I 0 
*4— *— 

O 3 

• 4-» 

13 


CL Q- CL 


o I 

co .E 
£ E 


0 x: _ 
T5 .25 05 
- c 
0 

.E 3 


E c .E 3 
CX — —— 


05 O 
0 Q. 0 

2 o. a. 


CO 

CL 

CD 


0 ±= 
E § 

S 5 

0 o 

'co* c 

CD .2 
x: o. 

|l 

Z o 


& 

0 

0 

W 


O 

DC 

UJ 

LL 

0 


■o 

C 0 ±= 

0 “ O 
c c *- 
o c 

Z -o .2 
2 0 g 
to *o ^ 
c E cl 
O 2 CL 
o co 0 


< 

0 

UJ 

o 

^8 = 
8 c® 

8 C35 2 

_j w O 


2 o 

si _ 

= to 2 


I § 

0 O 

® L 

.E I- 

0 o 

clq 


2 -8 
— c ^ 
2^0 

® 5 ^ 
3 JO 


0 


z to 2 
w tr 
© o 

CL 

*o « 
c c 
0 0 


© 

^ 0 CO 
o < ^ 
0 *o >2 

2 o 0 

? f © 

o "O 


© 

X3 

2 

3 

o 

§ 

0 

0 


0 tr .to ^ 
©oi-c^- 
** ° c 5 S 

~ ,r.i 
c 

§ 


o 
2 o 

8 c 
O © 

© E 
■o tr 

o © 

I & 

5 o 
0 

■0 CO 
CD b 


CJ 

I— .E 05 


© -tr 
° 0 iii 
0 CL .C 

0 S' 8. 

tr u_ 

E O CL 

0 <Z- ^ 
0 0 O 

>. E 0 
■sc 2 0 


CO 3 


2 ^2 


0^2 


tr 0 

o 0 c w ~ 

Z E S CD O i= 


2 

3 

,o- 

3] 

T3 

C 

0 

0 

0 

CD 

s 

2 

o 

c 

0 

s 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

■O 

c 

0 

c 

.05 

0 

0 

Q 

o 

S 

.0 

0 

co 


o 

■o 

c 

0 

TT 0 
2 0 
o ■o 
° 8 
0 05 

£1 
0 = 

© 2 
0 XD 

= 5 
0 0 
c 0 

0 Q. 
CL Q. 

K © 
0 

0 o 
.c o 

0 ^ 
•S- © 
q: 2 

C T= 

O 0 
m c 

0 ~ 

2 S 

l_ 

^2 
a: 2 


0 

■p 

0 

■O C 

c — 
© o 
0 0 _ 
05 O 

•S Ql 

8 2 

•g/c 

05 05 
© 0 

© T 

2 5 

05 >•- 
O 0 
O 05 

i! 

0 2 
0 TD 
TJ c 

! ? 
05-§ 
O 05 

0 c 

>- 'O 

S; © 
0 © 

1 I 5 

0 C 

i_ 0 
© 0 

2 XT 

o l- 


0 

0 

© 2 

© © 

0 2 
co xr 

? 1 
2 >> 

E Q- 
o E 
tr O 0 
to © •§ 
^ 2 o 

«8 05 

-O -o 2 

© E o 
= 0 CD 
tr l-- © 
00 — 
o 0 E 
0 2 o 

X3 O)^ 

Il3 

o 0 0 

5 3 2 

.© © tr 
c o ° 

o 0 2 

© > -0 
O o 0 


< 

O 

UJ 

O 

C 

03 —* 
O = 

i*= co 
c co 
g>_cg 

OD O 


•r= 


CD 

C 

03 

XI 

CO 

T3 

c 

ID 

O 

L_ 

CD 

CO 


03 


"D 

— 03 
tr* n 

= ^ z 

o o * £ - 
0 05 ® 
O -O 


3 


0 2 


o 2 

E 0 
0 > 
'0 © 
co 0 


5 


o 

S5© 
^ 0 
0 ■© 
E 3 

2 0 
Q. O 


— o 
o 0 

.©'o 

2 CL 

"O 
c 0 
o 0 

18. 

s-e- 

UJ o 

0 r; 0 

O © 0 
= 0 = 
0 o Hr 

2 CL co 


'O’ 

CL 

CD 



















p 

c 

o 

o 


in 

LU 

_l 

CD 

< 


c 

p 

’« 

c 

ra 

o. 

X 

Ul 

© 

c 

© 

D. 

d 

. 2 . 

'© 

03 

s: 


Q) 


£ 

eo 

w 

cn 

o 


cn 

c 


c 

p 

ro 

05 


05 = 
E -Q 

l'c 

o ©- 
.2 « 
2 0) 
cc 


© 

©C o 
<U 
© C 
CD O 
c S3 

(0 CO 
p 05 

c ■ 

05' 

CO 


CO 

05 


CD 


CD 


CD 


CD § 
O ~ 
© © 
o S 5 

1 ^ 

05 

w 


c 

O 

© 

3 

CO 

> 

LU 


CO CO 


CO 

N 

CO 

X 

c 

o 

o 

*5 

3 

CX 


03 

■o 

0 

k— 

03 

Q. 

0 


<o 

.0 ^ 

C 03 
v- .. Kj 

o 03 

= ^ 3: 
03 

O C -a 

B 1 .§ 

C ». 
CD 3 O 

© 0 - c 

glS 

o o co 
o S .O) 
i_ 9* etc 
0 t/) 5 

i si 

CO o c 

E o 5,3 

ssi 

■ ■“■03 

^ C 3 

1 © § 
■*~C C/5 

W CD LU 

§ if -2 

O )" 5 | 

‘■5 c •= 

M T3 

C '3 

m Q CD 


CO 

TD 

L_ 

0 

N 

0 

JZ 

c 

o 

o 

0 

0 

3 

O’ 


0 

CL 

Ji 75 


*= co .P 


co 

N 

co 

I 

c 

o 

o 

© 

© 

o 

CT 


© 

Q. 

CO 

-C 

O 

.co 

s 

I 

<3 


-O 

c 

CO 

c 

o 


CO 


,© ° •■= _ ^ 

r co E 5 'f 


to o 

CO ‘ “ 

p 
CO 
> 

UJ 


O c 
£ © 
CO 

_ © 
CD £ 
£ 0) 
P 9- 
o o. 
CD CD 

CD 


CO 

■E 

CO co 
td o 

« c 

-2 co • 

TD -~ « 
C « CO 

■2^2 

© « 

CD © 

H O 
~ C 

o> — 

c TD 

CO © 

' N 


o 
cj 
© 

o 

fc— 

CL 
CD 


3 


CO 

CD 

c 

o 

1 _ 

CL 

I 

c 

o 


® © 

CT 2 

-) CL 
CD CD 
£ £ 


>< 

ID 

td 

CD 

p 

o 

> 

eo 

CD 

ID 


TD 
© 

CT g 
0 
0 


C _ 
O) o 
O 0 
0 
3 

cr 


■Q _0 1 — 
CD £ .E 

'« 05 
0 0 


.2 £ 


o 

0 

Q_ 

0 

0 
■♦—« 

CO 

0 

E 

v_ 

o 

t 

© 

Q. 


.a e c o © 


f £ct 8 9 © O o 


■O 

c 

> 

■O 

3 


0 “ 
> 

if •§ 


0 

CD 




CO C 

Is 

CO £ 

ct c n 

* § 


■O 

3 Q 
O Q 
5 X 

5= o 


3 VI/ 

9 CT © 
§ o 13 


c 

0 


•^5 £ P 
^ 


E S 


i_ © 

O CT 
o :-t; 

© "s 


« 'O 

© « 
ID C 
.2 .2 
© o 

II 


~ O M 

o E © 
co © © 
© 

> 

o 

ID — 
.2 © © 
© 


o 


a; u c 

O D C 


8 CT 

° © 

© W 

0 XX 


■O 

0 

‘I 

E 

O 

if) 

0 

SI 

,0 

0 

CO 


w rx 


c 

g> 

co 

0 

a> 

c 

‘l_ 

0 

0 

c 

O) 

c 

0 

0 

© 

c 

E 

k_ 

© 

© 

■a 

p 

3 

O 

5 

c 

o 

0 

3 

0 

> 

0 

CO 

1c 


o 

E 

CO 

0 

if) 

0 

-C 


0 

0 

CD 

n 

tr 

o 


0 .2 
^ *i_ 

0 
CT) 


E 

o 

0 

■4—< 
0 
‘l_ 

Q_ 

O 

Q. 

Q. 

0 

0 

V— 

0 

0 

SZ 

if) 

c 

o 


0 
CL 

— e co * 

V Ilv TTT 


^ LJ. ^ ±1 

r p E .9 


0 


CD 

c 

o 

0 

</> 

■*—' 

c 

0 

E 

0 

o 

0 

CL 

CO 

T3 

O 

E 

co 

'0 

co 


3 

5 c/> 

05.9 

'© CO 
© O 

CT CE 

■D O 
© © 
T3 CD. 
C © 
© C 

CT 
© 

O ® 
O CT 

© (D 
C 

© = 

c © 

E - 

E CL 

0 0) 
0 -C 

ct r 

p p 

o © 
o •*— 

§ <= 

c 

o 


© 

■O 

© § 
CL c 

9-® 

o *“ 
w 


© c 

-C © 
■“ p 
® © 
.E o 

E © 

»- CD. 
© « 
© X3 

TD 
O © 


O © 
E CT 
z © 

CO 

0 o 

3 Q. 
§■ 2 
E cl 

O fls 

O 

0 


*o 
c 
0 
if) 
if) 
0 
c 

o 

^ x: 


= CT © 
© © 

§ £ 

© CO 

ap 

Q. © 

oj 

CO t 

C 0 

o ~ 

~ 0 
0 CL 

■— SZ 
SZ o 

E Z 

P ^ 


> 

0 . 

E ^ 

05 © 
.CT co 

<n © 
© o 
TD © 
c 


I- CO 

© o 
O CT 

S3 © 

TD E 
c 

8- 


c 

o 


© 

O) 


© 


© 

E 

^ © 
J8 
© © 
© ©5 


Q. ±3 

© g 

> § 

© o 

SI 

is 

g .E 


.2 E 

v_ v— 
0 0 
> 0 
0 "O 
0 O 

li 
© © 
■O CT 
3 © 

o g. 

g CD. 


© .“ 

ii 
© © 
" o 


CD. 

E .2 ss 

CT ^ 

2 © 


"O 

c 

3 

0 

o 

c 

0 

E 


0 

0 

v_ 

o 

Q_ 

O 

O 

c 


't O 
0 

CL 0 


o 

0 

CL 

E 


c « 

o *- 

■^3 0 

0 .a 

.2^ E 

•- 3 


*o 

Ss 


© s J 

5 C g 
O o -b 

■*- ffl © 
C -s c 

CT 2 o 

•OC © CD 
0 CD 
0 ^ 0 

c © E 

x= 0 

© >rr 

i: E'en 

r ©^ 

o © u - 
>» © © 
CD. = p 
O © _ 

« 5 © 
© « © 

© © Cl 

TD - kU 


CT -H 

‘5 O)-J 

o .E W 

i: W O 

2 © 
p o 2 

3 o 
o 


g 3 r. 

m © C 

•2.LL O 

0 _ X3 

CO 0 0 

£ ® i 

o 

X © ,E 


>• w 

§1 
© s 

05 © 

CT C 

8 © 
© © 
P g- 

3 — 
O >- 

5 2 

S| 

© S 
£ § 
^ © 
© 

© © 

© C 

© S 

Q 8 
— © 
© © 

2 E 


O 7S 


5-13 












Mitigation Monitoring Program for the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 


2 * 
E 3 
o '« 

c ° 
o CL 
2 co 
S CD 
OC 


"O 

c 

CO 

d 

_l 

co 

o 

d 

cc S 

UJ -I 
U. CD 


-o 

c 

CO 

d 

—I 

CO 

o 

d 

cc 2 

ID -J 
LL CD 


CD 


CD C 
O O 
C ‘X= 
CO CO 
O O) 
*♦— '+—> 

8 )^ 


CO 


< 

O 

ID 

o 

|i = 

£ o — 

£ §)£ 
_J w O 


< 

o 

UJ 

o 


5 c — 
l.o = 

to ^ co 

8 .l >2 

_i co O 


CO 

CD 


CD 


CD 


oo 


CO 

o> 

c 


CD 

td 

w 

CD 

> 

O 

CO 

0 . 

CD 

X. 


c > 

co co 

o = 
CO CO 
- 1 TD 
LU .2 
CD ~ 

al 

CD — 
® CO 

d 5 

8 co 

c £ 

o .g 

o CO 
CD t 

c -2 
T, Q. 
-d cd 
E? <D 

® "co 

m co 
^ co 
CD o 

f d 

CD 5 


CD 

TD > 

3 ® 

O 

5 o 
co td 

2 © 


^ 2 
2 -Q 

o 2 
Z co 
- co 

I? 

TO.es 

CO 


0 

W 

O 

>> 

n 


c 

o 

TO _ 

o> .55 

"O 3 c 
C ^ <D 

TO C o 

C .2 Q- 

2 o re 
re 2 y 

i— -—• “ 

CD CO CD 
Q. C > 
O O £ 
0)0 Q. 

c co o 

TD — I— 

5 .2 

to> CO "c 
CD TO 03 

£ 2 E 
? TO cc 


?2 . 
TO TO § 

8 £ TD 
= CD 

S 2 re 

— TOC 

Q. O .2 

(D 5 B) 

£ CD ® 
. C CD 

w Sr 
TO .2- Q 
5 0-2 


CD ® 

P 2 


>. 

JD 

TO 
CD 
c 0 
co 
o 


CD 


-C CO •= 


TO Q 


O 


• ® 

CD £ 


hr C 
O CD 

•= O 
.TO Q_ 

C TO 

2 2 

2 ® 

Q- o 

-TO TO 
O) TD 
- 0 ) 


- 

TO j- S 

"O | O 

0 03 C 
TO 02 
JC CO 
TO C 

9 *“ O 

g O) '■= 

2 

> to 2 

, TO CO 

o E 2 

D- TO 0 - 
-C CD.TD 
O) c C 
'TO .E TO 


© y p 

O -g O) 

TO 'co c 

Q- r- CD 

® « a 

■TO TO CD 

~ TO Q. 

TO O o 

® 

•— cd E 

_i m to 

“Si 

£11 

£18 
= TO O 
CO TO).* 

1 ® re 
£ £ .a 


CD 

o xc 
° o 
o c 

C — 

E 8 

co s 
£ "55 
re E 
9- 2 

"o 2 
V- CD 

E "TO 

TO cO 

■I "2 

2*1 
tr cd > 

O TO .« 
Z o co 
. O CD 
TO E x: 
Q. c r 

2 § o 
TO O Z 
TO 2 - 

O TO C 
TO 


c 

TO ... 
C CD 
TO C 

E □ 

i 

0 < 

So 

?£ 

■J= c/) 

<0 r? 

X o 


CD 

-C 


0 

-C 


CO 

o J 

CO 03 

u_ 

0 0 
-X CL 
0 
0 


0 
c 

0 

£ 

C 

o 

k_ 

0 
co 
5 

CD 
o 
TO 
t 
o 

CO 

-r O 


5 

o 

u_ 

0 

0 

g 

■O 

c 

o 

o 

i— 

o> 


0 

o g 
TO £ 
O CD 

Q_ 

O)-TO 

O 

-E 5 

0 

E o 

0 

O S3 

£ 

o 3 

/■N 


E © 
S | 

TO 5 

i « 

TO t 
>- 3 
CD CO 


<0 

CD 

Q. 

Q. 

O 


CO 

CD 

k— 

3 

0 

0 

0 

E 


0 .9 
» ■*-< 
CD 'c: 

O) o 

CD 

> 

CD 


-O 

c 

TO 


CD 

C 


c 

o 

o 


c 

o 

o 


TOT?- r: 


O "cO 


0 


0 -O 

r © 

! c 2 
-TO TO d 
0)-0 O 

r o 10 

3 TO 
O o ® 
2 g TO 


2. CD 

O CD 
« £ 
"g £ 

O) TO 

E 5 

8 I 

E 
0 
0 
0 
0 


CJ 
0 

© 75 


0 ( 0 - 
^ CD 


0 


ZJ 

0 

0 

O 

o 

■O 

c 

0 

a> 

0 


0 

0 

0 


O) 


0 

0 

0 




t: 

0 tr 

m- 0 
° > 
0 "O 


o j. 


O) 


0 

o 

"co 

CD 


TO E 
a. .2 
2 o 

CO 3 


^ . . 

2 £ 
TO O 
TO c 
i: cd 


O) 

L- 

0 


TO co TO a, TO 

0 Q. 

.S *5. 


0 0 

—^ (— 

c o 

.E o 


o - 
w co 

x> CD 

2% 

3 CD 

2 £ 


c 

o 

o 

1 & 

o 2 

O CO 
CD CD 

x: 


c 
o 
o 

"i w 

o 

TO 2 

2-8 


o 

v_ 

0 

0 

w_ 

0 

■o 

0 


JD 

TD 

0 

k_ 

CT 

0 


*o 

C 

0 « 
g 0 

_0 *Q 

8 -« 
o S 

TO = 

II 

c co 

C 'TO 
CO -Q 
^ TO 
TD 

O TO 
C '■?= 
TO TO 
J= TO 
—^ ■*— 
*- o 

0 Q. 
Q. 

0 O 

TO « 
TO TO 

.2 TO 

TO E 

5 ~ 

s.‘§ 

'5-E 

TO TO 
>- ° 
TO 


05 -i. 
TO -S' 

TO 


TO 


g 2 

TO g 
CO •= 
CO H- 

E ° 

— CO 

° § 

CO 

TO CO 
O) o 
CO J3 

o - 

— >s 
CO TO 
C TO 

.2 o 
■*—> 

3 >. 

TO .2 

TO Q. 

.2 o 

= a 

£ cl 


TO § 

TO’q. 
k TO 
2 TO 


TO 

o 

c 

o 

TO 

■c 

o 

CL 

CO 

c 

TO 


TO 

k_ 

2 

TO 


■c 

o 


c 

CD 

E 

O) 

CD 

co 

TO 

■g 

CD 

N 

3 

TO 


TO d 
P 2 
re 


c\i 

co 

CL 


c 
re 
TO .E’ 

2 E 

re m 


O) TD 
TO TD 


TO E 

§2 

i_ H— 

t td 
re ® 
O o 


*. CL 

o — 

r- re 


I— co re 


8 ! 
“ E 
co o 
.2. w 
CD cd" 
^ o 

II 

| £ 


C TO 

re £ 

5 £ : 
re q. 

CD 
CL ° 

re TO 
TO^ 

re o 

2 E 

CD cO : 

re £ 
S5 «■ 
to|- 

O TO 

td re 

— TD ■ 
re 3 
£ TO 

!i, 

Sis. 

S '" 0 
co re: 


re 

o 

re 

co¬ 


re o 

TO ~ 

E « 
S °> 


C ■ 

O) 


CO 


< 

O 

UJ 

O 


c 

re ■—■ 
2 = 
£ co 
c CO 

O) re 
co O 


< 

O 

UJ 

o 

c 

TO 

2 = 
y co 
c co 
o) re 

CO O 


co 

TD CD 

« -TO 

TO ^ 

® re £ 
P x: re 
co >s -TO 
TD ~ g 


O 

CO 

CD. 

E 


TO = 

re -2 


^ to 
re to 

S 0 - 
2 re to 

re re .2 
o. *- 
C o CO 

2 TO *J< 
Q- O 2 

re ^ 3 

-TOCO 
I— re o 


CL 

re 

re 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

O 

o 

0 

"3 

o 

w 

0 . 

= •- 
CD 0 
Q. tl 

■5.2 


® x: 

£ o 


2 O 
x: 
g 


■= TO £ 


CO 

re 

J. 

TO 55 
d TO 
D o 

= TD 
O 
O) 


co 
re 
co 

CD . 
CO C CD 

© re 
.9- o) 
_ "e 

'5-^1 

re — = 
^ 2 
3 CD 

8^ re 
o ■ — 


re 

c 

3 

o. 


CL O co 

>< © ® 
© a) to 


re 


I- < 


5®o 

2 E re 
o re ^ 

o td £ 


C <0 

o >- 
•.= re 
re xd 
.E 5 E 

■— 3 


cn 

0. 

CQ 


CO 

CL 

CQ 











Mitigation Monitoring Program for the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 


03;= 

.E .g 

s'S 

E ° 

o °- 

2 CO 
d> 
QL 


a> 

<* 
a) c 
o o 
c -zz 

TO CD 
O 03 

; 

c ■ 
g>‘ 
CO 


CD 

O) 


CD 

.o 

m c 

8.2 

o H 5 

Is 

g> 

CO 


o 

CD 

Q. 

E 


•o 

c 

CD 

O 

_i 

CO 

O 

o' 

a: ^ 

LU -I 
LL CO 


< 

a 

UJ 

o 


2 CD = 

£ o — 
E w 
to c <o 

S 03.2 
_J w O 


CO 


8& 

3 o 

O d) 

CO > 

£ 0 
_ -o 

o 

cp 


T3 O 
C — 
^ TO C 
^ CD ® 

^2 i 

^ 0 (/) 
* (/> 
0 


O) 


CD 


°z 

_0 z 

CD c 

o. o 

§1 

CO ^3 

o 2 

TO s 

E 8 

-- CD 
Id - 


cn — 

•i|T» 

o i c 
— TO 
C O . 
O ^ CO 
3 C' — 
•“= CD 3 

TJ E m 
<5 E 2 

w £ 


CD 

1 -O 

> e 

T> ro 
CD W 
o £ 

0- 5 


CO 
- CD 


CD 


- CD 
C Q_ 

3 Q- 
O <r 
Q. E 

CO 2 
CO vTO 

£ cn 
-o .E 
■o -t 

CD 3 
o co 

£ P 


! CD C 

Sjg 3 

.t; T3 "O 

52 ai 

CD 

2 z 5 

3 2 to 
o .2 ■> 

8 £ 

-I ™ 

03 ^ - 
o oc .c 

end- 2 

2 CD CD 

o sz C 

= H i 

O . CD 
CD C 


CD 2 

SQ.Q. 


2 E 

3 cn 
o c 
co c 
CD O 


u> ro 

- i 

cn to 
o -d 
o £ 
c ro 
o £ 
_ 0 J o 

cd ro 
O- 03 
c “ 

° E 

| '8 
E CL 

- CO 

to d) 

c a? 


o c 
Q. TO 


(/> 
». a 

o ^ 

CD C c 

jz o CD 

2 i! I 

•| g o 

> .y CD 
0) o 
g 5 CD 
to 2.s 
•o £ —i 
>— o 1 

O (D < 

o — 
o CD CD 
CD CL x: 

C (Dh- 
- CD ° 

CO m T * 

CD jjj 03 

O o CD 

2 5 o 

a-.E,^ 

O) CD C\l 

CCD « 
t ra 
o tr§ 

CL o 

3!2S 

| s’l 

Si <8 

TO ^ ',A 
u fy. CO 

3 9- c 

O CL O 


r- * 4 — 

o o 

O CO 
- CD 
CO ' 


CO 

1 o 

3 TO 

l| 

O 3 
O CO 
0 co 

o 8.0 

1 2 z 

cd £ > 

co' CD P 5 
CO co 

■C £ 

O C 
Z CD 
- CD 

2 J 

0 a) 

m 

TO 

ol 

=z TO 

to ro 

£ o 

o TO 


TOE 2 


CO 

“O < 1 > 
<D ^ 

= CO 

TO ^ 

■° m 

O — 
■ZZ 0 


TO 

c — c 
0 (0 o 

E CO -4- 

o o 


<0 

a> 

3 

•D 

<D 

O 

o 2 
^ ® a 

CD o’ c 


(/) 

GO ' 

c 

*+- 3 

x: A" o 

0 

0 

E 

•— C 

O o 

O V3 

o o 

o 

L_ 

■> 

c 

£ c 
tl o 

^ -4— 

= TO TO 

CD 

0 3:-^ 

0 

^ 3 
C 

LU 

>? o 

o 2 r E 

c 

O (/) 

~o 

^ 2 > 

9--° ^ 


0 


-O T3 

£ "o 

TO < 

co 

I -d 

O 2 

£ § 
i- T3 
O C 

<2 8 

5 TO 

C ^3 


o 
cd 

■ct cn 
T3 ■— 

a 5 

CO c 

^ ° 
CM E 


o 

§ <D 
cn-g 

c 


CD O 
co .-t; 

8 | 

o E 


3 

O 

c 

c 

TO 

Q. 


2.8 
o 2 
0 T3 

2* § 
0. CL 
_ CO 
T3 d) 

2 S- 

!= O 

TO 

3 05 
CT £ 
CD 05 

ll 

~ O 

3 i 

_CD d) 

ra £ 

as 2 


TO CO >- 
_ CO 3 

0 o n 

I 

o ^2 
co £ 0 

0 0)C 
CL C 3 

§2 8 
.2 TO c 
o cn 0 

3 £ 0 
iz _ 

« W >. 

O UJ 2 
o N — E 

V4— 0 

° o 
g>o 
■- 0 


E c 
TO 0 


o 

E I 

f 8S 

UJ TO C 

0 8 ® 

^ TO C 

1 oi 
5iE 

3 TO •O 

2 CD 


>. 

JO 

TO 

co 

CO 

0 

o 

0 

c 

■a 

0 

c 

E 

0 

0 


■TO £ 


CO 

CO 

o 


0 

O) 

CD 

k_ 

o 

CO 

o 


a: 

^ o“ 

■%u 

O _ - 

o TO 5 

c| J 

0 £ 


CO 
0 
o 

k. 

_ 3 
Q_ O 
co co 

C 0 


c 
0 
o ^ 

CO 

5 ’0)“D 
2 o 0 


IS -TO 

^ TO 

CO iJ- 
CO CO 
£ 03 

o 
TO O 
cd t; 
O c 
c;r o 
E to 

03 TO 
W TO. 


23^ 2 = 


o 


3^0 

— i— u» 

^ • O 

= « d) TO 

2 O TO 5 

03 O CLS= 


O 

0 


Too’ 

03 

ro cl 

0 ±3 


CO 

O 

Q. 

0 

■o 

c 

0 

c 

o 

CO 

L_ 

3 

o 


o 

o 

o 

o 

u_ 

Q. 


a»- 

8 o 

o'2 
a. 2: 

“m ° 
<0 ■ — 
•=■» O) 
0 

m o 

x: * 


•tr 

o 


^ aj 

c Q- 
.2 0 
o .2 

3 v ^“ 

0 

2 £ 

8 2 . 

03 £ 

TO Q. 

ll 

O § 

u. 5 


CD 

0 

x: 

- co 
O 0 
- 1 t 
CO TO 
O CL 
CD "O 
£ £ 

O 2 

CL 0 
UJ c 
u_ - 
0 0 

SZ -£= 

o o 

“ “O 

■o c 

TO TO 

J af 


TO 


Si 

O TO 

$ £ 


< 

O 

UJ 

O 

c 

TO ^ 
2 — 
it= co 

C CO 
03 TO 

CO O 


c ® 

O U. 
S 0 
TO JD 
2> £ 
^ 3 


3 

o 

o 

CO 

0 

o 

3 

O 

CO 

0 
1_ 

TO 

O 

03 

O 

O 

C 

O 

TO 

CD 

CL 


O 

C -TO 
O TO 
ft TO 


CO 

c 

o 

O -O 


d) "O 
> 0 
5 CO 
CO TO 
TO 0 
CO O 

0 c 


c 

o 

TO 03 
03 C 

'+-> v_ 

E -2 


_Q TO 

■O £ 

0 .TO 

"O 0 


— 03 £ 
TOC 
CD £ £ 

*■ = CO 
TO TO 
0 CD 


C ^ t= — cc 


£ 0 
O TO £ 

^ TO O 
X3 /i 


O 
0 O 

xr to 


03 

$ >, o 

o -TO 5 

X3 CO 3 
TO CD Q. 


3 to 

CO 5.2 

8?I 

O 3 TO 

TO O E 

d3 <— O 
C 03 O 


CO 

0 

o 

L— 

3 

r TO 
O TO 
TO a> 

W Z 
O CD 
TO O 
0-03 
TO O 

0 o 

CO c 

TO g 

T3 CD 
TO CL 


N- 

CL 

CD 


5-15 












in 

LU 

_i 

m 

< 

l- 


c 

o 

'« 

c 

ro 

Q. 

X 

LU 

0) 

_c 

ra 

Q. 

Q. 

ro 

‘<0 

m 

■C 

i— 

O 

Z 

CD 

■C 


E 

ra 

ct 

o 


o> 

c 


ra 

CT 


>. 
CT = 
ra -o 

|'g 

o Q- 

.2 ra 

2 E CD 

cc 


CD 

$Z o 
<*S 
CD C 
O O 
C 

CO CO 
O O) 
'tZ 

<z> 


CO 

O) 


CD 

O 

0 

CD" 


8 .2 

o — 


c ■ 

CT 


CO 


o 

CO 

Q. 

E 


C <o 

o <- 

t= CD 
CO -O 

.2> E 

~ n 


co 

CO 

5' CO 

u .2 
CO g 
CD 


CD 

CO 


O 

_i 

co 
o ® ro 

- £ CO 

OoJJ 
OC X3 O 
UJcol 

U_ CO C 


< 

o 

LU 

o 


CO 

o 


8 o)iS 
■ ra O 


co 


ct^ E 

C CD CL 
CD -C CD 

E ^.Q 
® 2 
Q .—1 

E co 

^.5 

n ±= 


co m 
C CL 
O o 

rtz l_ 
05 c 

cO o 

=5 © 0 

5 £ w 

_ 3 


o •= c 


co co m co 

4 —• 

rN _ *“ 

n 

£ § 


^ CO ' "O 


o 

§.£ 

•i 8^ 

S C Q> 0 

CO ” o ll 

s’!? 8 

its 2 


2?cdc 
§ ® = ra 
| ■o S O 

.m _§ £ -o 

to Q. -o CO 


CD 


<r « 

^ -C 
S CO 


CO 

Ll 


O ll o 


< 

O 

LU 

o 


c 

ra —- 
o = 
It: co 

C CO 
ct m 

co O 


CD 

CD 

£ 

£ 

l 

3 

co 

c 

o 

o 


.2 ? Q 3 ra -S 


2 

ra 

o 

5 

ra 

'ra 

co 

JZ 

■c 

o 


O 

_i 

CO 

COQ 

Is 

s? 

® ra 

3 O 

o DC 

2 ® 

ra £ 

CO 


o 


0 


o c 

0 0 

° □ 

O -V 

< 


.0 

® CT 
CO C 

11 

I » 

h- .tZ 

col 

lo 

8 8 

O o 

cd 2 
co > 

CD O 
£ Q. 

<2 ra 

.2 ra 


o o o 


(D 


CD ~C 


cd ® 

f f 

co O 
ra c 
ra o 

ra o 

>> P 


ra q. 

~ o 

c 8 

ra .E 

cl ■& 
3 
o 
§ 
c 
ra 


o 
CD 
CL CO 
CO CD 

ra 3 
.c co 
" ra 

.2 jjj 

3; ra 
Sflli 
CD C CD 
~ o ~ 
ra co ~ 
—1 CD c 

Q 'o ® 

= -a 12 

® ra .2 

•*—> - r~ 

~r^ *— 

c _ >N 

ra 2 8 
.. ra m 
CD Q. 

.E ra 

J 3 


CD c 
■Q o 

ra 

> ^ co 
5 lj ra 

CO (n CD 

•2 'ra E 

> « 
u “ 


CD s. 


O 

ra 

CD 


DC 
o3 
2 
O 
■a q" 

CD “- 

2 CC 

£ °8 
ra «=r 


E 

, o 
CD 2 0 

III 

c 0 z: 


o 

3 

1— 

"co 

c 

o 

o 


0 


w. VU 

"IE 

CD O 


•O 

CD 


ra 


o £ 
ra co 


5 o ra O 


I ° 

ra o 
Q. co 
E ® 

O 5; = 

o S' ra 


ra 

o. 

E 

o 

o 

ra 

ra 

> 


CD 


p c 

S E 0 

8 >i: w 

ra ^ Q 

■d -o ra 
© z: 

® N|- 

:i.i d 

2 \E ra 
il EE 


® 
■o 

ct ra 

c o 

CS C 

« Z 
3 7:3 
2 . ra 
ct 

ra c 
*- ra 

® E 
_ S ra 
2 >, CL 
■o E 

CO — 

ra ra 
2 -Q 

o 2 
ra 3 

|l 

ra ra 
E £ 
ra 

CT CD 

8 3 

8 ra 
b cd 

ra E 

E o 

0 I— 
0 

■o CO 
0 0 
"o 


0 

D 

"O 

0 

> 

O) 

3 

0 

N 

E 

c 

E 0 
o .9 
c > 

gz 

3 0 
0 c 
° O 

0 -2 

CD iz 


C 
CD 
>% O 

3 ra 

C CL 

ra o 

T 3 oj 

ra o 

-2 Z 

w ra 

> g- 

E 8 

— O 

0 
0 x: 


0 

■o 

0 

o 


tZ 0 
0 (/) 
= 0 
0 O 


n 

0 

c 

o 

0 

0 

0 


8 ® 

E o 

ra co 
n E 
co 2 
c co 
o w 
co f 
ra E 
ra ra 


o 
ra 

>,T 3 
CO c 

■o ra 
ra 2 

q. ro 

CO ■ C 

ra T 3 

.i §> 
0 
CL 
C 
3 


^ 0 ^ O O 


c 

0 

O) 

0 


0 0 
0 

^ E 

2 ra 


cd >- 

ra o 
cd ra 

CL 

ra o 


T 3 

C 

ra 

« 

■o 

ro 

o 


ro "o 

l> 

0 

CL CL 
CL C 
0 3 


73 

0 

> 

0 

CL 

C 

3 

■o 

c 

0 

0~ 

•O 

0 

o 

k— 

•O 

0 

> 

0 

CL 

C 

3 

0 

C 

o 

0 0 
■O "O 
0 0 
0 o 

CL *“ 
0 0 

ra 8 

o o 

*F O 
ra ra 

> -o 

ra E 
o ra 
3 


■o 

0 ) 


■O 

CO 

o .. 

>- CO 

•o b 
® o 
ra -o 

Q. CO 
•' 0 - 
ra ^ 

S ® 
2 6 
CO CD 

= 8 

? O 

^"5 
ra c 

8 | 
o E 
•o c 
ra E 

3 « 
? ra 

■g i 2 

ra c 
Js O 

CL CL 

ra co 
_ co 
S CD 

ra o 
ra g 
o co 


■D 

c . . 

ra ra 

O) 2 

c 

3 2 

C O 

ra cd 
n 
>> co 

ra © 

CL 3 

CO c 

•d E 

ra 

.b m 

2 8 

® ® 
L_ ^ 

ra co 

co 


ra 

ra 


ra s 
ra £ 

CL~ 

o 5 
ra i2 
«5 — 
ra 2 
0 °- 

0 ) 

3 g 
^ 0 


■Q 

C 

0 

0 

C 3 
•— O 
0 O 

.0- 0 
CL 0 

d) -- 
£ O 

H- 0 

O ^ 
C C 

.2 § 

o o 

5 CT 

1 8 
§E 

O ro 


81“ 

O <D 


O 

0 


0 
C 

o _ 
’0 o 
o 0 

53=8 


•a 
co" ra 
c ra 
o -= 
8 


0 


0 
0 73 
CL 0 
.*=0 0 
gd § 

o|° 


w = ? ra 


1| 

x o 
ra o 


c ^ ra 
:B .-2 E 
E ‘5 « 
ra ra 2 
ra -2 
3 "a iS 
ra c co 
ora© 


co cm 

a. 2 2 

CD DC CC 

z < < 


5-16 
















Mitigation Monitoring Program for the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 


.g jd 
o'| 
c o 

o 9 - 
2 © 
S © 

a: 


a> 

S3 o 

< x> 

(D C 
O O 
C S= 
© CO 
o CO 

E ; 
ra¬ 
te 


co 
o jc 


■o 2 

c 7 a 


_ co 


co 

co 


W ~ T3 
CD © C 

r 3 co 

S«T5 

2 C © 

co ^ o 

. 3 
© rr J; 
cO g w 
® J c 
Z E o 
© tr © 

CO CD 
°~ CO 


co 


c 

'co 

-*— 1 

c 

CO 

E 


o © 
o c 

o © 

E?f 

CO g 


CO r- 

■g O 

© CO 


o 0 

Cl 


- 

i2 © 

.5 .> 

a> 0 
"o 

81 

■o E 

SSS 

© £•= 

O) t (D 

CO O 
Cl o E 


CD 


O 


E 

„ o 
CD © 
c 


co 

CD 

O J2 


O) 

co 5 


o 
cvj 
5 o 
-9 — 

'co CO 
> © 

E 

— o 

2 c 

CO © 

co 2 

© CO 

© g 

c — 
o o 
. ■+-* 

O CO 

3 C 

o 

'co 

CO 


CD 


2 o 

> CM 

1 r 

— co 

2 s- 

co © 
CO >_ 

© o 

CO C 

si 

1" 
© (D 
CD — 

© o 

c 

3 


o 


T3 

c 

« 


2 © 

W CT> 

© co 

*- c 

>. 2 > 

.tr co 

> u. 

o ^ 

03 CD 


~o 

c 

03 

0 

3 


0 


0 

o 

0 

ti 

3 

0 

■D 

0 

N 


"D V_ = 


0 

XI 


X3 

0 


o ~ rz 


o . 

CD 

0 f: ' 

S 8 

CL 


XI 

O 

0 

0 


0 


Of - 


0 0 O 


2 

o © 


© CO 


CO 

!e 
0 0 
> - 4 - 

33 O 
o ^ 

o ^ ^ 
O 75 


«$ t/j 

■D 
C 
0 


VJ u 

i_ 0 

CD CL 

° 

0 


•fa o © 5 ^ c 

•+±r— '-w •— fl) 


0 


w 5 - 

0 0 +iZ 

E O 0 


0 
C 

o 
0 
0 

E 
© 
c ^ 

© O 

a. _ 

° 

2 © _ 
w © ^ 
0 Cl ci 

S£?. 

5 ^ C 


CL 0 

or 

c 


0 

0 

xi 


o o> ^ 

§ 5 

§ | 
o © 

t CO 

© © 

3 

© © 

sz © 

r © 

E 


o - 

c 

3-2 
o © 

3 


T3 © 

© 5 

.Q O 
O 


— CO 
3 

•o 


© 2 
© =7 


© 


>* CO 9 _>> 'in © 


o 


Q. C _ 

Q. © © 

®d a 


^ w 


CL C 

a. © © 

© -a q. 


CO 
© 
a 

© h 

3 © 
© 8 
E' © 

S £ 
o 

CL © 

E 3 

© o 


E > 


o 2 •= 


5 

> 

CL 

E 

o 


© § 

S E 

> © 

ft 


O 

%.*> 

0 M_ 

O 

CD 

0 C 

0 g 

O 
0 

£ 0 

0 | 
0 
0 


0 


0 


“O 
3 2 

O o 
^ 0 
> n 
> . 

c £ 

© o 

a -2 
0 0 
0 XI 

51 

si 
© £: 
o w 

© O 


o © 


© 


4= S 

© .i= 

O ©■ 


CO 


© 


o> 
c 

© c 

~ 3 

.£ -D 

o © 
o 

§ o 

a. c 

o 0 


0 

XI 

c 

0 

CL 

O 

c 

o 

O 

0 

3 

D 

■o 

0 

0 

> 

0 

w 

© 

© 

co .. 
S' ©> 
£ JE 
©- 5 
P ° 

5 © 
©2 
© V) 

cn © 


CO 

3 

-o 

© 

> 

O) 

3 

© 

N 


>< C 
“ © 


O 

t— 

© 2 


© 


© o — 


■a ° L 


n 5 




E 

'c 


2 co‘ 
c ® 
©~ 

© © 
-a c 
■o 2 

3 O 

o © 
£3 


0 


0 

C 

0 

XI 

I 


o 
0 
k_ 

c 
o 
o 

0 

XI . . 
0 

rt= 0 

.. k_ 

3 

c/) 
0 
0 

2 ^ 

w o 

eg — ii 2 c 

rr» LO ^ 


© 


E o- .E 

:= © — 


O -E = Jr 


© 


c 

o 

o 

E 

o 


m © 
© c 
O 


© 

£ © 

CL CO 


s © 


c 0 

o © 

2 CL 

Z co 


4= i 


c c 
© © 

© — 
(/> 
© w 
^ © 

2 o 
o © 
^ o 

© © 
JC .© 

is 

W > 4 — 

3 O 

© ._. 

O © >4 
= © .-= 

p © 
© © 
© Q. 

sz o 


© 5 


© 

c 

13 

© J: 

© 5 

o 8 

2 ts 

>< 3 

E T3 

2 2 
3 ■© 

0 <D 

~ Q. 
Q. 
0 
0 0 

S® 

■0 -© 
■> o 

g © 

.E -a 

© © 
© © 

2 c 


o 

§ 


>, 0 
~ o 


« 

3 


© 

2 g 
5 > 

© ?■ 
ro E 

3 o 
•a 0 

o 

c 

._ w 
© 2 


> 

TD 

C 


V) 

-a 

ra 

o 

k_ 

•O 

0 

> 

0 

CL 

C 

3 

C 

o 

*o 

CD 0 
T3 

3 s 

cr o 

0 

»- 0 
0 
0 
o 
*0 o 
3 « 

O -O 

B © 

*1 

03 

~ -C 

E T 5 

1= 0 

2 © 

© g- 

Q- 5 

0 

•O 

c 


0 

■4—• 

0 

0 

c 

E 

k_ 

0 

0 

TD 


~o 

0 


0 

XI 


_ TD 
3 C 
0 0 
0 . - 

2 c 

E 0 

0 E 


0 

c 

0 

T3 

0 

3 

0 

> 

C 

0 

O . 

o "O 


■Q 

■o 


3 O 
O ^ 


o 

CM 

© 

x: 


52 i 


© 


±= T3 2 © 


.tr © 
© 3 
c cr 
© © 
■o ^ 

> 2 

§ © 
o © 

5 2 


o 
o 

© 

k_ 

0 
XO 

i 2 
® 2 
g i 

© 4 - 

— c 

CL © 

E E 


o 

o 

g 

o 


© 

4 _ 

3 

CT 

© 


© 


© 
CD ' 


© O 
© ••= 
E © 
o .f 

1 ^ 
o> 

CO 


o 

© 

CL 

E 


c « 
o >- 
•7= © 
© Xi 

■ 2 > E 
■— © 


00 "O 

11 

Z o 


■o CM -O 


5 ° 

< o 


5 § 

< o 


5-17 












-S' 
ct = 
C e 

i'g 

o 

£ w 
Z 0) 
CC 


E 

C 

0 

d 

_j 

CO 

o 

d 

CC ^ 
LU _l 
LL CQ 


E 

C 

03 

d 

—I 

CO 

o 

d 

CC 2 
LU -I 
LL CO 


E 

C 

CO 

d 

_i 

CO 

o 

d 

CC 2 
LU -1 
LL CO 


e 

c 

CO 

d 

_l 

CO 

o 

d 

CC ^ 
LU _l 
LL CO 


CD 

u 

< 4 
CD C 

o o 
c -e 
co co 

O 03 

M 

CO 


< 

o 

LU 

o 


S c — 

2 g = 

$ g © 

_J w O 


< 

O 

LU 

o 


s s = 

JC O — 
8 03 £ 

J mO 


< 

O 

LU 

o 

c c _ 

5 s = 

© g w 

8 ct £ 

_J 03 O 


< 

O 

LU 

O 

|l = 

£ o — 
© g W 
8 0 ,£ 
-J 03 O 


c 

o 

o 


in 

LU 

_l 

CO 

< 


Q. 

C 

o 

03 

C 

(0 

a 

x 

u 

CD 

c 

"OS 

Q. 

h. 

CO 

CO 

m 


o 

Z 

CD 


E 

co 

t- 

03 

O 


O) 

c 


c 

o 

0 

O) 


CO 

03 


03 

3 
E 

> <= 

■M .2 

03 ^o 
3 O) 

ii 

5 CD 

e £ 

■2 CD 
CO CD 2 

o CO CC 
o < 

03 • 

© 2 e 
0 £ c 

« Q- © 

U o- 

§ §5 

- o < 


C\J 


CD 
0 © 

03 o 


ao 

Q. 


•fo m 

1 g’o 

O ~ £ 
g C 03 
CD = 
£. P © 
£ © £ 
m Q. 3 
£ C 03 

■c £ co 
O >® 
Z jd E 


03 2 
rti ^ 

03 ■§ 

s= co 
c ^ 
CD <0 

E ^ 

Q.S 

E c 

— CO 
E 

£ O 
o -P 
w o 

fll 

2 © 

CD 


C 

_cd 

. Q- 

C c O 
CD o 
E CL 


0) 

"5 

CD _ 

iE c 

E P 


.E c n 
cd ^ 
• • cd 
CD 

H 0.i 

IS 
© <§ 
©* © -2 
CD >- CO 
_ Q_ 'i_ 
£ _ 0) 
Q. CO 

CO 2 


CC 
o3 
2 
o 

£ 03 
- ■*—> 

sz 

.tr c 

g ® 

8 I 

m °- 

£ E 

E“ 
E 1 

11 

CD 

CD -ZT 
c 00 
•j= CD 
c d 

_CD 

-Q w 
7 
O ^ 


CD 

XI 

E of 

o © 

L_ *— 

*♦- 3 

®! 
O E 
£ -8 

*- CD 
CD Cf 
A 

o 

O 


0 >• 

CT i i 

-8^o 

<D 03 1- 
c r (D 

gi 

£ o 

03"° 


g 

o 

E 

c 

£ c 


•5. 

CO 


I t 
' o 


3 

o 

g 

co 


■E 

O 


3 . 

O 03 

c c 
o o 

O L= 

n « 
£ o 

3 ^ 

g © 
•2. CO 
CO g 5 

1= -^3 

o i5 

Z CD 


c/> s 

C/5 

CD Q. 

o o 

CD ^ 

co-S 

J3 = 
~ O 
© w 

CD *_ 
.P O 

O- w 

o 

o-£ 
CM 

g y 


£ -o 

CO 0 

w § 
0 O 

£ -O 

ra £ 
0 ^ 

E 0 

O g 
o o 
c c 

0 "O 


c 

_o £ 

0 0 


03 0 
0 O 

£ 5 

0 


.2 “ 0 


c ® 

2 a 

CL 3 


C © 

0 w 
O 0 

w 9 
£ uj 


E 

o 

k_ 

•O 

CD 

c 

’cn 

JD 

O . 

« o 

> c 

g 0 

— 03 
0 © 

2 c 

CL © 

a E 

0 © 

w £> 
w 0 
0 c 

II 


03 

£ -C 

c O 

0 E 

E g 

0 - 

fi 

£ CL 
>, — 
-Q 2 
£ c 
o o 

0O 

•i 3 

c Q 

§E 

2 0 
0 


c 

= 0 

w u - 
© CC 

0 ^ 

03 2 

s o 

E w 

2 
3 
O 

g 
0 
"0 

CD g © 

x: p T3 
E b £ 
O 0 O 
E C 


— C 
© 
£ 
3 

' W 


o 

0 •- 
c >. 

tJ g 

CO p. 

0 ? 
sz ~ 

E 

O?.. 

£g 0 

■o £ 0 

'g o ^ 
0 

><E > 
0 p; •£= 

g 1 0 
g c 

9 ® o 
— « 
o> 2 
- c .2 

2 o © 

O 3 CL 
'■P "O P 

2S| 

© 0 5 

C E O 
O E ° 
o 3 E 
© 03 

E T3 £ 
•»- C 
03 0 £ 

~ 0 g 

.2 £ « 

£ g 0 
2 ° © 


E 

03 


0 0 
0 £ 

0 o 

—I CD 

Q o 
0 £ 

E E 
• 4 -- CD 

o w 

£ 0 

E £ 

■4—> - 

11 

>> o 

0 Q. 

! g 5 ~ 

p|| 
cd 

4>J 

W 

c 


0 © 
■O E 
£ 0 
0 o 

11 

CL o 
0 c 
c o 
0 •*= 

1 O 

j§ 2 

E 


_ © 
03 © 

c 2 

■8 0 
o — 

3 


0 

0 

> 

0 


0 


0 
E ® 

W Q_ 

O 0 
° 0 

If 

fi 

o 

E O 


0 
E 
E 

1 -Q 


0 03 

si 
— 0 
o 5,0 

« U, E 
E 0 

£ 0 

?* 

© 

0 0 
03 0 
© P 
>- 0 
03 — 

0 0 
© - 

E 3 

|'S 

g 9 

c 
o 
c 


E 

03 


0 

> 

O 

£ 

'u 

0 

0 

E 

03 

c 

3 

E 


0 

w 

0 


© 

E 
0 


g 

0 
L— 

CD 
•+—> 

£ E 


0 

O 

c 


g g £ 


© o 

i— _ 
© 


0 

O 


E 
© 

0 f— 
© £ 

© © 
> 0 
■■P E 
0 O 
C C 

0 oo 

5 2 
g*CM 

E o 

0 
(/) 

CD 


"O 

C 

cd 

*o 

CD 


Q- 

3 

c 

cd 


O CD 


E 
0 
EE 


03 

_C 

L 

3 

E 

>» 

0 

g 


E ^ 
03 


0 


0 

> 

o 

c 

o 

0 

0 

03 

0 

> 

3 

O 

E 

C 

3 

E 

L 

© 

E 

£ 

E 

C 

0 

03 

c 

c: 

0 

« > 
2 0 

E g 


0 
5 8 

c 9 
2 -9 

'0 2 
© £ 
ETC) 
0 = 
> o 
■p © 

° 03 

g>£ 

•= N 


0 -P 

l£ 

o °- 


E 0 2 


> 

E 

0 

L_ 

CD 


o E 

CD 
C 


,_ o 

c 

cd 

o 

o 


_co 

o 

o 


co 

13 

o 

"O 

c 

cd 

CD 
C CD 

■■O 

^ £ 
hz cd 

CD <D 
CD 1 

C a) 

o 5 
'c: a) 
© ® 
£ E 


£ ^ 
8 2 
0 o 

E E 
>- ^ 
S § 

•— E 
© C 

o « 

o © 
o © 

"© £ 
© 0 

g| 

CD > 

jz £ 


>» 

cd 

^ - 


CD 

cd 

CD 


cd 


c/> 
c 

CD O 
C •■£= 

cd 


ii 



o 

o 

L_ 


c 

SZ 

o 

05 

o 

*L_ 

c 

CD 

o 

g 

CD 

i— 

O 

CD 

> 

0 

O 

*o 

■O 

cd 

c 

cd 

CD 

c 

u. 

Q_ 

o 

CD 

CD 

V— 

0 

L__ 

0) 

c 

CD 

CD 

0 

0 

> 

JD 

0 

CD 


cd 

"cd 


L— 

3 

"cd 

0 

£ 

C 

_ 

c 

cd 


*L- 

CD 

CD 

c 

"cd 


E 

'cd 


p .p • 


0 

* _ 

o 

0 

co- 


0 o 

o ~ 

8 

i 

03 

CO 


< 

o 

UJ 

o 

c 

0 •—- 
2 = 
£ w 
c w 

03 £ 

</) O 


< 

o 

LU 

o 


c 

0 ^ 
2 = 
£ w 
c w 

03 0 
CO O 


< 

O 

LU 

o 


c 

0 ^ 
2 = 
£ w 

c "3 

03 0 

(O o 


< 

a 

UJ 

o 


c 

0 — 
o = 
£ © 
c © 

03 £ 

iO O 


o 

0 

E 

E 


o w 

0 3 

O ‘O 

t 5 

cd -tr 

SZ O) 
3 

o c 

C •“ 
•2 | 
o </) 
2 £ 
© E 

O o 


0 0 
o 
E 

C ^ 

£ E 
E CT 

II 

Cd £ 
CD CD 
— CD 
-C O 
O “ 

€ o 

5 CD 


■o 

c 


ol 

w . 
= w 
E c 
® 0 
Eg 

2 -Q 

■«- _3 
C . 
O W 
0 
3 


c c 

O 0 
o £ 

S 0 

w ■= 
c E 
o — 

O 


g 

o 

£ © 


E 

03 

CM 


0 £ 

t'i 

© 


© 


© 
E 
>> 
0 
jj: 

0 
0 E 
C P 


o 

« 

.p 0 


^—: k_ ^ 

£ m 3= © O 


-X 

O 

O 


0 


i 0 E 


i ° 
£ © 
c -X 
o 0 
O £ 


3 £ 

8 O 

2 C C 
0 O 
c E- 
£ .9-0 


O E 

CT F 
0 £ 


o 03 
c o 
O 0 
•p E 

3 E 

£ 2 
C 3 
O O 

O g 


JC 
O 

o 

E 
0 
E 

O £ 


3 
O © 
O © 


E 

C 


0 


E 

« 

E 
E © 
0 -g 
E g 


0 
O 

0 <5 © 

g 05 


cx> (— CD 

ci -E o 

-7 CD cd 
CT £ t 
£ E W 


if) 

o 

CD 

o 

cd -o 

Q. C 

E g 
IE 

O 8£ 
g 0 £ 
c 0 © 
•2 go 

O E CL 
5 03 c 
©£ .2 
C E 2 

o .-p 2 

O g 0 


C <0 
O 1- 

■J= 0 

0 E 

.2>E 

•P 3 


03 

CL 

CO 


Q. 

CD 


CL 

CO 


CM 

CL 

CO 

z 


5-18 













& 
0) = 
£ 

o © 

4—* L_ 

C O 

O ©- 
g W 
2 © 
ac 


T3 

c 

CO 

d 

_1 

cd 

o 

d 

tr 2 

LU -I 
U. CO 


"O 

c 

co 

d 

_i 

CO 

o 

d 

ac ^ 

LU _l 
LL CD 


© 

©T o 
CxJ 

© C 

o o 

C 'X= 

CO © 

o o> 

C ' 

g>* 

CO 


< 

a 

LU 

o 

s C 


ro 

o 


w ~ 
w 9 


O 

LU 

o 

■O 


© 


w 


8 05 © 
■ w O 


w ~ .. 

©05© 


© 


'© O 


c 

o 

o 


in 

LU 

_i 

CD 

< 

I- 


c 

o 

<75 

c 

© 

a 

x 

111 

© 

_C 

© 

Q. 

Q. 

co 

’© 

CD 

.C 


© 

-C 


E 

© 

i— 

o> 

o 


CT> 

c 


c 

o 

© 

a> 


c 

o 

ra 

05 


CM 

o 

CL 

© 

£ 

Q. 

© 

TO 

© 

■4-^ 

O 

© 

w 


o 

w 

Q. 

O 

os 

c 

3 

.-9 © 

9 © 
© © 

3 © 
© — 
■- © 

El 

© -j 

05 O 

C ■© 

= os 

© © 

05 <- 
© .9 

L_ 

05 Tn 


5= 

O 

4-^ 

13 

.C 

if) 

if) 

if) 

O 

c 

3 

if) 

E 

o 

■4—» 

if) 

> 

if) 

c 

o 

c3 g 

cn a) 

H 

CL CL 

2 "O 
O 0) 

C T5 

£ 5= 

O 05 


■o 

c 

05 

05 

3 

3 

o 

05 

05 


_co 

o 

if) 

"D 
(D 


O 05 
_ CO 

« ° 
© Q. 
© © 

0.3 

© O) 
© c 
x: S 

©I 

■MS. 

E .a 

0) 


© © 
O) . . 
C CO 

05 CD 


E © * 


© 
o 
*- « 
o © 

05 O 


c 

E 

k_ 

o 

3 


a; © 


1 5 
S* 


o 
ra 

Q. 

E 

o 

o 

co 

c 

© 

■> 

© 

© © 
© 


© 
o 
© 
CL 
© 
© 
© o 


© 

Q. 

W 


c 
'c 
ra 
© © 
o > 

TO 


O OD 
<E *“ © 

O _ N 
m TD u 
CL © O 

W 9 § 

Q. © 

§ i 


CD _Q 

n 


o 


<D 


03 


c 

05 

CO 

05 


05 


CD 


CD 


TD 
C 
05 05 


05 >_ — '-4-* 


CL CO 

5 E 

Si 

h_ 

© © 

•o x: 

So 

2 o 
CL © 
O) "D 
c 


.2 C 

•§ 3 
2 5 
.9 o 
© © 

E .© © 


o .9 

© 

.9 9 
© ’« 
© © 


Q. X 

£ 2 


© 

c 

o> 
c 

2 © 
© z 
© © 
■Q © 
© o 
3 Q) 
« JC 

O — 

c 

© 0 ) 
.2 E 

»- Q. 
© = 

© O" 

E a 
1 = 
O O) 


£ E 


T> 

“ 3 

© o 

© 5 

© CD 
C 


>» 

© 


c 

ra 

o. 


■o © 

05 © 

I > 

w £ 

CD 

■4—<> Z1 

o -C 

iS ^ 

c 

— CO 

fl 

o © 
© o 
0.0 


05 

*c 

© 
_c 

© 
Q. 

r= "o. 


O 

O : 


© 

s: 


© 

« 

o 

© 

OJ . 
® « 
O © 

o o 
o p 
.2 © 
■o > 


■o 

c 

© 


cc 

< 

oo" 

0. 

CD 

z 


■o 

© 

© 


© 

© 

L_ 

3 

CO 

05 

CD 

E 

c 

o 

© 

O) 


© 


o 

w 

© CM 
©2 
© oc 

CD < 


sis 

CO 

CL 


05 


CO C 
CO 
05 


O <0 
CJ) 

c 

’if) 
if) 
O 

< - 

S i 


© 


CD 


© c 
© 
o 


O QJ 

c E 

.if 

o < 
Q. O 

© 5 
w — 

p © 


c 

““ 4—* 

© © 

§ .-9 

© Q. 

JD CD 
Q. O 5 
a) 2 © 

«!| 

„ © O ® 
.2 © p cd 


CD CO 
05 

k— 

CD 

© l -o 

i r— 


s © 

£ O- 

© o 
© 


w 


© 


Id © © 

— T3 -O 
© 3 C 
O ■*- O O © 


2o 

|q 

•|x 

CD 0) 
-C 

o .€ 

z g 


05 

O I 

© 


E- 


p 

3 

2 N © 


m • 


5 
ra 

'© __ 

CD © O 


© 

w 

O 

©?- 

CD- 

8.9 

g .Jf 

1 i 

05 

W 


o 

© 

CL 

E 


< 

O 

LU 

o 


c 

© 

.9 = 
It: W 
C « 
OJp 

CD O 


© 


© 

w 

o 

L_ 

o 

*o CO 
3 05 

I § 

L. Q 

2 ~o 
© o 
■s; © 

Q © 

— i— 
_ © 
© Q. 

f 1 


T3 — 
E 3 
> © 
5 © 
© *“ 
W > 

o ra 

o E 


© 


c 

o 

ra 
© 
i _ 

o 

© 

CC 


O "O o 
u c « 

w © O 

© -O g- 

o © ® 

o M © 

r 

.2 5 © 
r o a 
g o 'cl 


w « 

5? c 
§ § 
9 o 

il 

©9 

© 25 

CD © 
# © 
si 

c ©5 


© 

■C — 
3= O 

c © 




Q £ 

9 >. 

CD -O 
C W 

O « 
© c 

ac § 

^ o 
O T3 
c c 
o © 

3. « 

CD .9 

o ra 

X 

CD ^3 


© 
o © 

CD © 

9 9 
© © 
.9- | 

Q. 5 
© . 2 , 
o © 

05 _ 


© 

C 0) 

4—• 

9 | 
© 5 
O) C 

© 

p‘! 

> 9 


_ 05 ^ 
0-^3 

c 

CD 

Q- 
O 


^ 05 

c m 
o o 

© O 

.95 z 


o © 

CO = 
CD 

C CL 

© o 


iCc 'x' 

^ © © n fc 


_ © © 
© o 

.0 I = 


.2 § 0.-5 


O CD 


© T- 

E-E 

© © 


5 2 


•£ tr 


© 


© o 


© 


w 

c . 
- TO 
>* © 
■Q o 

i_ >- 

O © 

sg 

> © 

< tr 

i 5 

® 3 

^ o 


a) 

co 

>> 

CO 


£ O) 


05 


o © 


© 

© 

•O 

a) 

1 

CD ~ 

x: 1- 
-- © 
c x: 

w o 

L. 4- 
© 

C 

g 
o 

•O 
c 
© 


_ 9 c 
3 -o cc 
SSo 

c © "O 
.9 ^ © 

"O 05 
O 0 "D 
o c 
O ♦- CD 
CO 

c 
CD 
-Q 
CD 


•2 SE 

CO ^ 

E if) 
a) cd 
V) E 
>>-^= 
co 


5 Q- 

2 E 
© o 

E § 

© o 

© 3 

9 .2 

11 

eg 5 O 

§| 

o o 

_ o 

© c 

.9 o 

.05 c/) 


S= © 


c v -' 


S 2 

® E 

if) 

c >,- 


CO 

XI 

o 3 
> 


2 © © 05 .C o 

.9 © 0 


2 .2 g'-o 


© T3 i2 9 


O g 


CO 

CO 

o 

l— 

o 


CD 


< 

o 

LU 

o 


c 

CD 

o = 
itz co 
c co 
03 _CD 

iy) o 


11 

© 5= 

.9- c ^ 

CL O c 

E s 

r c q 

O - » 

9 a. © 


.9 3 

4—> L— 

O CO 


c 

.2 © 

■o cc 

■O r 
3 05 

8 S 


c o 
o >- 
= © 
© X5 

.95 E 

~ 3 


CM 

▼“ T3 

CL. -- 

“ O 
Z o 


CO 

q! 

CD 


CL 

CD 


5-19 














Mitigation Monitoring Program for the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 


& 
C 0 ) = 

g 0 

o g 

C O 

o °- 
2 0 
2 0 
cc 


(D 

C o 
<.d 
0 C 

o o 

C S3 
CO CO 
o g> 

CO 


cO 

O) 


2 

o 

© 

CO¬ 


CO o 
CJ ~ 

m P 

g P 5 

£ ; 
c • 
O) 

<o 


o 

CO 

Q. 

E 


C O 

o »- 

S3 CO 
CO 0 

.2>E 
•— 3 


TO 

c 

CO 

d 

_l 

CO 

o 

d 

cn 2 

LU -I 
LL CD 


< 

o 

m 

o 

= c ^ 

5 g = 

p ^ 0 

g o >2 

-J i O 


0 

TO 

c 

CO 


TO ^ 
c .5 
co 5 

CO TO 
.2 >, 
co 5 
cl 5 

B -c 
~ S 5 
o ' 
c © 
O £ 


03 


CO O 


<D 

£ 

O 

w 

03 


c 

o 

JO 

o 

03 

CL 

E 

© 

co 

O) 

I 

TO 


eo 'o 

"co CO 

g CO 

■2 t 

co p 
> c 0 

o CD 
co 0 
0 ~ 

L— 

=5 9> 
« o 

2 o 


CO 


o ^ Q_ 
§ ■£ o 

O) g 5 
0 .E 

s I 
0 2 


CM 

P 

0 Q. 

CO CD 

. z 

■5! 

CL CO 

cc SP 
5 | 

— TO 

C ® 

TO ^ 
g CO 
-E 0 

11 
P ® 

•2 § 
CO tZ 

k © 

o g> 

c/D !tz 

2 E 


< 

o 

LJJ 

o 


c 

o = 

i*= 0 

<= 2 

0)0 

CO O 


0 8 
§|o 
§■2 S 

u O u 

O. Q. © 

0 E 

£ 0 C\J 

'o 2 00 

3 

o 
o 


c 

o 


O 0 

3 0 

S= c 

0 3= 


O a 
TO CO 
C o 
p >- 
E ° 

0 5 

E 2 
•0 0 

0 ^ 
0 O 
TO 


C CO 
O CL c 

O O-.E 


0 


0 


0 

o 

c 

0 

•e 

o 

CL 

E 


■a c 

0 ® 
0 o 
5 co 
° 

t « 

< p 

ffl 3 

r i 

O 0 

II 

0 E 

O 0 

TO S3 

< < 


TO 

C 

0 

— TO 

8 0 

o i 0 

0 0 TO 
2 — -=; 
h 0 5 

0 E a 
-0 0 

<* 0 ^ 
:«og 
0 TO TO C 
E 0 ) c 0 
O’: (St 

- 'E c o 
S 0 § Q- 
0 2 5 .i 


in 

CL 

CD 


O) 

0 

1_ 

o 

c TO 

o 2 

2 3 
O CT 
¥ p 


< 

o 

LU 

o 


5 c ^ 

5 g = 

p ^ 0 

g 00-2 

_J -0 o 


c 

c 00 . 

2^0 
L= 0 = 
0 0 0 
O ®> 


o 

c 


0 


o n 

TO O' 0 
0 0 > 

1 is 

CO 5 © 
0 0 £ 

TO - -E 
E 0 
i5 -0 TO 
0 
0 

* 0 — 
0 0 0 

® Se 

TO Q_ — 
0 0 - - 
0 0 
O Q.T 

Q_05 

O 0 0 
Q. 0 0 

w 5 £ 

0 -g o 
•2 a.^ 
0 CO ^ 

■E 5 o 2 

E "0 o. 

0 0 
o 0 . 

Z 0 o 


0 

o 


< 

O 

LU 

o 

O 0 _ 

5 g = 

0^0 
g O) « 
—i ’55 O 


0 ) 

"3 


a) cd 

JZ JZ 

g «0 

CD — 


CO 

CD 

L— 

o 

© <D 
CO O 


0 




c 

co 


o-g 


c 

-2 8 C 


o 

II 

0 .2 

o S 

O CO 


0 

o .5 


a. 

E 


0 

0 *- 

E ° 

0 o 

a. 0 


CD 

£ 

CD 


0 

0 

TO P 
0 1 
f E 

§=5 
< ^ 
p 2 

f i 

O 0 
0 > 
.2 0 
Q. E 

O 0 
TO 33 
< < 


O 

O TO 

ffl 5 

2. 0 

O c 

0 E _ 

CD 0 tl> 

6 =-> 

„T0 c 

o E p 

0 p t: 
O.T 0 o 

■Me 

TO p — 
0 E © 
0 0 -D 

ill 

2-.E 0 
.E Q. co 


TO 

0 

0 

d 

_J 

CO 

O 

d 

cc s 

UJ -I 
LL CD 


< 

a 

UJ 

o 


| s = 

£ O — 

0 c P 

g a*« 

co O 


n 
o 

0 

O M- 

•s= o 
® 0 
0 o 
co)s= 
0 0 
> Q. 
0 ' E 
0 o 

Q- w 

cc ® 

i< 

0 ^ 
« 
© 0 

p © 

CD g 

x: p 

-0 c 

O 0 


TO 

0 

n 

o 

L_ 

O) 

CD 

£ 

CD 




c 

•0 

c 

CO 

CO 

CO 

0 

1 — 


0 

0 


CO 


O) 

"5 

0 

CO 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

O 

O) 

Q. 

O 

c 

0 

> 

0 

fc 

CD 

“O 

0 

l_ 

l_ 

c 

C 

0 


-o 

c ■— 

CO O 

c5 


O 0 

5 
o 


0 

0 0 

H 

1 1 

0 TO 
TO 0 

1 — 

O 0 

o 0 
8 ® 


!l 

•=• © 
p O) 
CD 0 

0 > 

£ S 

2 i 

. co 

2 TO 

.2 c 
o 00 
a 0 
J= © 
00 

O 3 
O V) 


~o 

c 

_c0 

k— 

CD 

> 

o 

c 

o 

■*£ 

3 

L_ 

<0 

c 

o 

o 

CD 


< 

O 

LU 

O 

c 

CO — 

o — 
it= c n 
c co 

C3_C0 

0) O 


o> 

c 


*o 

c 

_c0 

> 

o 


£ * if 
3 c 0 

S’ 0 

CO 


>N 

JD 

TD 

CD 

CO 

3 

CO 

o 


co 

CD 
CD CD 
C CD 
CO 


c n o 


CO 
.c 
o 
0 0 
o *- 

S? 

© « 
Q. 5 
x o 

0 S3 


0 

^ >- 
Tt P 
0 5 
0)-J. 
E o 

o,? 
TO 0 

5 .2 

0 S3 

"2 

II 

O CD 


CL 

CD 


TO 

0 

0 

d 

_i 

co 

o 

d 

cc ^ 

LU _J 
LL CD 


0 

0 

0 


< 

a 

LU 

o 

0 . 

0 

o 


0 

0 


0 'S .. 

0 CO) P 
-J 0 o 


O --S 0 
• 3 = 0 >- 
CO 0 TO 
0 — c 

8-8 « 
c 0 

v_ 

3 


2 c 

O — 0 3 0 

~-'r> ^ 00 

O 

•0 CD 

TO — 
0 TO 
O ® 
0 0 
0.33 

E w 

o p 

° 3 
_>> 0 

2 g 

§ E 

p 0 
0 o 

?'p 

i-S 5 

ll 

p O 
c © 
O 0 


if-5 
o -2 


0 

0 


.2 -0 

0 CO) 

I— 0 


S3 . c 2 
-- c — ™ — 
>00 
Z'Q. P 

° ^ c 

02 — 

EO S 

g ^ 3 

i 


c p = 


•2,-a il 
0 © p 

CD jq — 
^■0O 
o 0 


■0 

O <]) 

Z -O 


0 0 
3 


o p 

p ,2 

CL CO 

E . • 

00 ^ 

002 

Jr 2 CC 

■2 0 < 


< 

O 

UJ 

O 

C 

CO ^ 
o = 
it= co 
c co 

O) JO 

0) O 


p § 
o w 
co 

■§ 8 
0 p 


0 

0 

o S' 


« 


o 

>- 


5 0 

o 0 

o 2 

P m 
Q. P 

E 2 

o o 

O 0 


•^ 0 
0 u. 

0 0 

Ip 

.2 ■§ p 

o c p 

33 = 

£ O O 

2 o) ^ h 
p ^ © 0 

8 g £ 0 

>-3z CO) S 

> p .g 0 
8s § o 

f 

0000 


ao 

ol 

CD 



















Mitigation Monitoring Program for the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 


& 
o> = 
.E X) 

l'c 

o Q- 
.8 co 
2 0) 
CC 


CD 

C o 
<a 
<D C 
O O 
C 'X= 
CO CO 

o o> 

li 

0 ) 


■O 

c 

CO 

d 

CO 

o 

d 

CC 2 
LU _l 
LL CD 


< 

o 

LU 

O 

c ^ 
CO = 
o — 
' £ 05 
«o p co 

8 05® 

_J 'go O 


c 

05 

-C 


03 


0 

0 

~a o 
11 

•si 

S’S 


> 

jD 


03 
“O CD 

c — 

03 


o 

0 — 

•= co c 


= >. c 


co 

O) 


CD 

k_ 

o 

© 

m- 


S .2 

m ® 

o .j? 


c ■ 

05 


CO 


o 

CO 

CL 

E 


c ® 
O 1- 
•J= CD 
CO X) 

-2> E 

- 3 


co 
• CD 
C >- 
CO 3x 

K 

o ^ co' 5) CD 

O co 

CL CL 

co E 


9 CO 

co 

CD 2 

CO C 


o 

to 


co 


co _ 

- CO 

S c 

§ ® 
>, o 

O) 


c 

CO 

CO 

CD 


E 

O 

2 

3 

o 
5 
.co O 

® CO 

CD c 


> .. 

CD © 

CD 3= 

T3 X r 

c- ® 
- £ 

9- <= 

c -8 

co cl 

o — O 

co o o 

CO © Q_ 

£ raw 

CD JD CD 
3 0c 

BE- 
Z E >> 


c 

£ t3 J§ 


05 


co 


c o 
> 
CO 


I 5 O 

to £ =5 

O O-Q 

O £ < 


0 

0 

3 

0 

03 

cd 

E 

Q. 

3 

C 

03 

0 ) 

o 

*D 

c 

03 

•4—' 

c 

CD 

E 

Q_ 

cr 

CD 

CO 

CD 

u. 

3 

T3 

CD 

O —‘ 

2 H 

Q. CO 


< 

a 

LU 

o 


c 

CO —- 

o = 

it CO 
C CO 

05 2 

CO O 


CD 

■C 

c ° 

CO T3 


c 

o 


CO 
© 
o —' 
Z O 
CD 

> CD 
— 3 

o 


2 
3 
O 

_ o 

(Oct; 


cd fc 

£ CL 

05 CD 

_ c £ 
05 O '- — 
“ " O 

CD 
CO 
CO 


E 

Is 

C "2 
O CO 
— N 

co ® 
© o 


<n ® 

1.-8 
co 5 
. cr 
co — 

s § 

o ■§ 

S co 

® N 
CO 


~ CD 
<D 05 

5 £5 

o 

05 


CD O 

ac ~ 


- ^ p 


o _ 

r> CO 
«! 
sf 


O r 2 

-- © -O 


CO 3 

krt aa ’—' k—• 


CD >_• 
CO 05 

11 
o ^ 
o © 

£-C 

05 — 

05 O 

CO co 

© 

CO 

o 


■O 

c 

co 

d 

_l 

CO 

O 

d 

ac r 

LU _J 
LL CD 


o 

LU 

o 

fl = 

£ o — 

® ^ co 

3 05® 
i ‘s n 


(/) o 


•== c o 


O "S 

«= 5 

00 o 
£ co 
T 05 
o "D 
c co 
C CO 

co >> 

I ? 

CO X) 

o o 

CO g 
£ >> 
CO rn 

a) 

jz o 

c I 

£ co 
- 5 

05 2 
>- 

5 9 

CD CO 

■o 5 

£ c 

O CD 

o -o 
5 « 

CO CO 

CO >, 

£ > 
^ CO 
O CD 

z E 


05 <D 

l _ r— 


^ c~ 


■C CT 


cr co 

a> 

c n 
CD 


03 


■ 5 O O 
06 c: 


CD 


CD 
*—» 
CO 

g 

•O 

c 

3 

o 

k_ 

O) 

o 

5 


or £ 

CO o CD 
'co C £ 
co 

•CD p c 

"co CD 


05 

C 


Z-E 

n L— 

> O 

« E 

5 ® 
2 

.■s; co 

T3 ® 

i I 

CL 

ac o 

o3 CD 

r « 
o 3 

05 
■C 


CO rt CO 


03 CO 
2 Q5 
o co 
CO TJ 
2 2 

2 1 

•a ^ 

2 ° 
V- CO 
® 05 

FT £ 9 S 


> CL 
O “ 
co co 

So 

s;±= ®2 


CO 


< 

o 

LU 

o 


c 

CO — 
o = 
i£ co 

C CO 

05 o 
co O 


3 x: 

5 = Q. 


o 
o o 


CO 

3 co 
T3 ^ 
C (0 
3 CD 

o — 

k_ k_ 

05 O 


c 
O CD 
O 5 ; 

T3 CO 

3 T3 

0 £ 
O CO 


05 

T“ 

CL 

CD 


?! 
I 8 


03 
co tr 

85 

3^2 
O -s 


CO 


CO 


O C 3 — 


£ o 

o 2 

co 2 

II 

x: ® 

o = 

c CD 
05 Q. 

I- CL 


CD 

2 2 

® 3 

5 CO 
s c 

II 

O I_ 
Lz, CD 
05 


CD T3 
Si C 
CO CO 


CD 

! 2 s 

5 8 5 

? ^ 8 
o ^ c 
O ^ b 

t.5 o 

Os i 

g £ . 

05 co CCS CO 

C CL g 05 

tj c cfl b 
5 .2 X5 O 

sf 21 

CO fc O g 


o 

CM 

Q. 

CD 

Z 


n 

c 

CO 

d 

_i 

w 

o 

d 

ac s 

LU _l 
LL CO 


< 

O 

UJ 

o 

2 c — 

® CO = 


LU - 

O — 

8 §5« 
—J co O 


.2 8 

~ 05 

JD £ 
CO E 

.E o 
co 


0 


c 

O c5 

CD ® 

|? 
3 ® 
0 CO 

3 g 
co ® 
co ^ 
CD g- 

€ 3 

o °- 

^ o 

CO w 

8 "2 
CD CO 

o r> 

CD - 

c 

3= CO 


2 
05 ® 
C X- 
■C O 

§ C 
CO — 
g "O 

CD ® 
T3 05 

O CO 
— DZ 
JD O 
CD CO 
05 T3 

CO T3 
■C C 

lo 

0 


0 

> 

0 

k_ 

0 

0 

■D 

C 

3 

O . 

V— v_ 

O) o 

0 C 
O 

o 


5s 

£ ^ 
3 ® 

o 
g 


v/ w /— 

T5 2 E 
•o 
c 
co 

CO 

L_ 

O 
Q. 

E 

CD 


co £ 


co 

<= XT 


CD 

•Is 

CO k_ 

o -2 

a. T 3 

0 5 

05 a 

c 5S 

•C 05 


- 8 

O X5 

£ 2 

2 8 
co 3 


o 


CO 


CO 

g 3 
05 £ 
"O CO 


< 

a 

LU 

o 

•4-^ 

c 

0 — 

O = 

it= 0 
c 0 
0)0 

0) O 


0 0 

c -Q 
3 ^ 
O co 
E E 

CO k_ 
m £ 

C g 
CO "O 
to § 

3 2 

W 05 


05 

£ nj 
o co 

>, O 
.*Z 

C 0 

o © 

I? 

£ co 

£ 05 

•o — 

p CC 


CO 


© o 

JD 
CO 


c 

3 

O o 
C O 

© o 


■O 

c 

« c 

8^ 

□ 80 
CD 2 — 
© ><£ 

£ ® « 
_ fc c 
05 ^ o 

E co -^= 
Ox:© 
co o 
co © o 

g> © r 

0 j A 
© — 1 2 
2 Q | 
o = fc 


CM 

0. 

CD 


05 

© 

> 

© 


© 

© 

g 

TO 

c 

3 

O 

k_ 

05 


5-21 

















2 * 
o> = 
£ -Q 

o 1 
c ° 
o °- 
.2 « 
2 © 
QC 


W 

CO 

5 co 
j ® 

CD O 

f c © 

O) 

— 1 cO 
CO ™ 

O © m 
•» *E- 0 
o o g 

CC -q o 
LU C © 
LL CO c 


O 

_i 

CO 

o 

x 

c 

CO 

O 

cc 

LU 

LL 


© 

c o 
<^ 

© c 
o o 
c •.= 

CO CO 
O 05 

M 

CO 


< 

o 

LU 

o 

£ c ^ 
co CO = 
£ o — 

*7 *j= CO 
g c CO 

8 o>« 
j 55 0 


< 

O 

LU 

o 

© a = 

JO o — 
<g ^ 0 

8 §5-52 
_J © O 


c 

o 

o 


in 

LU 

_l 

CD 

< 


o 

© 

'o 

I— 

a. 

c 

o 

‘35 

c 

CO 

a. 

x 

LU 

© 

c 

© 

x 

CL 

.CO 

'co 

CQ 


O 

Z 

© 

JC 


E 

CO 

k_ 

CT) 

O 


CO 

c 


c 

o 

x 

CO 

05 


CO 

CO 


co 

c 

o 

2 I 

© a> 
x © 

© _q 

g o 

X — 

C CO 

a c 
o o 


co 

g 

E 

co 

x 

o 

X 

C 

CO 

o 

3 

X 

o 


X 

© 

o 

3 

■O (J) 

o 
o 


© o ,© 


tr a) 

3 X 

>.2 
C 3 


05- 
TD ~o 
2 

gx 
£ 2 
§ S 

tr c 


~ Q_ 


Q_ 

O 

L_ 

Q_ 

Q. 

03 


o> 

c 

Q_ 

E 

03 
c n 


<i c 

g O 


_ O 


X ^ 


8 ° 

° o 

o § 

CD c /) 
O - 


c 

Q) 

a) 

-C 
C/3 
3 — 


as 
a> £ 
■o a) 
co 


-O 

o 


c 
0 
-o 
*> 

0 -O 


CO 


0 

© 1 
> .E 
0 E 

0 0 


E 

03 

c 

o 

o 

0 

-C 


o 
a 
0 

*- ;g 

“O CD 
§£ 

■O .X 3 

g > © 

o c 
© co © 

“if 


o x g 


S X 


XJ 

I i 

-4-* 

i- © 

O C — 
X O © 
O O X 


#.® 
1 S 

Z 05 
- CO 

8 2 
>_ a> 

© £ 
*2 CO 

C '3 
3 CL 
O O 
O J- 

§ & 
© ro 
co x 
8 £ 

8 § 

L. ^ 

-5 3 

X CD 

c c 
CO o 

>_ O 
© TO 

© 5 
© 

? - 
§ I 

O S 


X 
_ C 
TO 03 

?5 ® 
o !£ 
co « 

2 ^ 


C CC 

«§ 

o m 
o 


0 


0 

CO 

o 

CL 

CO 


05 §■ 

« 2 
c © 

§§ 

c 

o 

o CD 


■O 
© 

© 
o 
o 

Q. ® 
o — © 

*- 05 £ 

5 .£ 3 

— N CO 
Q. C 05 

co 3 E 
§ 5 - 
S x: ra 

a, ^ -s o « 

|l 

_ cc 

© o 

c — 

.2 c 
05 o 
© 'co 
CC © 

© QC 
'c C 
o 2 

•■= m 
© . 
o © 

© > 

£ CC 

05 o 

C m 
=6 2 
3 O 
O O 

.2 O 


© © 

© cl 
CQ 

X ° 
■C © 
o © 


© 

■C 


© 

x: 


© 


ffi .2 -2 *s 


© 

© 'x -a 

— w ra 
c x: 

2 ^ 

rn © 


o 

V) 


c .2 © 
© > sc 

. E 2 © 

■C CL-3 
© © 

■■O 


© 


a. ■ 
© 


Q-i 


CO c 

Si « 

£ 3 to" 
o I c 
f cl 

© © g 


© 


Q. © 


Q. © 

E ^ 


c 

— i—8 


^ © 

1 8 
© .2 
5 -o 
■o >, 
c c 

i« 

05 ° 
© 8 
— o 
•*= c 
o © 

© S’ 

© s 

SZ © 
O c 
2 CL 
T5 O 

| | 
o 

? & 
0 ’ZZ 

~ o 

2 e 

© "O 
3 

O O 

5 5 


c © 

8 i 

© o 

© c 
© -2 

i 2 


© 


8 £ 
© s 

CL C 

2 8 

3 

!*» 

c! 
.2 co 

P 
© © 
C -O 

o c 
o © 

II 
2 2 
x E 
© © 


5 c 
© © 

© CD 

II 
° 2 
o © 
o © 

__ 

2 © 

81 

5 2 

.55. & 

x: c 

o E . 
2 © £ 

T3 © 

© <-5 © 

© O © 
CL (/> E 

E .2 "o 

o o © 
o c rt 

2 

© © © 
© © *_ 

§.©8 

© ©- CD 
3 © o 
© CL Q- 
> cl .2 
© © ■o 


p 

3 

O 

5 

55. 

'© 

© QQ 

2 "C 

2 z 
© - 
© c 

ss 

in o 

3 

.2 V> 
sc c 
.•= o 
$ o 

■o © 

.© O 

2 = '© 

5 m 
© 

TJ 3 
— © 

© © 
© © 
$ ^ 




2 Z 



C 



tr 



0 .2 

TD 

C 


0 

z 


03 

c 

L_ ■*—" 

© © 

0 




’c 

© 2 

0 


c 


E 

0 . © 



0 

0 

L_ 

© fk c 

0 

0 

’0 


0 

0.55° 



0 

c 

0 

E 8.8 


© — 
W O 
© — 
sz © 
2 2 

° o 
c in 
O T- 


E-2 

© ^ 
CL C 

w w 
c 


© .5 
o 
o .t; 


© 
c 
§ 
o 

TO 

© 5 ©^ 
x: to © © 

fi|l 

?!i 1 


© 

o q5 
co x; 

© . 
E «2 

« 8 
OT * 
© 


© X 
3 

■o -o 


2 05 


© 

g 


•s. 03 

-^000 


0 
0 

u_ 

0 
0 

II 

© o 

8 


© 

£ © 
82 
co 


=; CD 
© © 
-X JC 

L_ -4—* 

TO 2 > © 
© © c £ 
o "a 

3 


O 

g 

8 © >- = ^ 
o 

3 


O 

g 


_ © o 

0X3 

-J -*-* 

■a ® w © 

a >% C 

c o 


0 


w w at 

O 0 O CD 


Q. 

co-i 

.2 © 
^ i5 

§? 
o c 
g 2 
o a 
©2 

2 8 
© o 
CO o 

8 .55 

© c 
c © 

it 


© c 
TO © 


© 
4-^ 

s. © 
5 TO 

.55. .2 
© — 
CQ ~ 
X — 

c 
o 


2 
w 
© 
co 2 
© © 

I! 

o © 

?i 
© > 

^.i 

© 2 
x — 
o 2 

© o 
c o 


.55, ^ 

© o 

co - 

^ 85 ® 
X g’x 

o 2 o 

2‘1 ° 
,®c 2 
>. © o 

o 

^2 © 
© -i g 

® TO g 

CT £ W 
© 2 « 

© © o 
g X o 
— g co 

© S ■_ 
g TO © 
© 2 
© T= © 

“ g 


© 

So 

’■4—* 

!| 
© > 
c 2 

%« 
E © 
2 x 

■4-^ 

© 

© « 
« £ 
o | 

2 I 

>, s 


<a 

© 5 
© 

© © 

X g 5 

2 © 

'g. © © 

i 

-O 

g c 

.55.- 

© 

CD 


X O 
2 X5 - 

55 -8 © 

x .2 © 

p > © 

.£00 

i— o 
© CL g 

55 © ® 

X © 
CO X C 
.2 ® © 
.tr T3 
> □ CO 
o o c 
0^0 


« ® 

O ■© 
Q. © 

E o 
© w 
. © 
« w 
© CO 

3 >> 

1 S 
o D 

Jd 0 
0 5_ 
0 0 

o g 

X g 


c 
© 
c 
© 

E 
© Cg 
O 

.2 2 
x ©“ 

CD .0 

*>s^ 


1 0 


2 O 


0 

0 

0 

C 

0 

Q. 

E 

o 


>. © o 


« c 
8 .2 

~~ V- 

X o 

1 - 3 
© £ 

© g 
5 § 

o 


• O © 
CD 2 § 

© £ g 

!sg 


© 

1 _ 

o 
© 
CQ J 


8.2 
S P 

ix ■ 

05 

cn 


< 

a 

LU 

o 

■4—» 

C 

0 ^ 
O = 

it: 0 
c 0 

O) 0 

CO O 


< 

a 

LU 

o 

c 

0 ^ 
o = 
i^ 0 
c 0 

03 _0 

CO O 


O) 

c 


05 w — 
c © £ 

.2 i 

x •© 


o 

© 

X 

E 


© 

■ 

© 

x 


05 
X TO 
© © 

II 

81 
c © 


3 

X 

X 

© 

k_ 

© 

c 

3 

O 

8 = 
© .2 

© o 

■° s 
2 © 
3 C 
O O 
o o 


JO 

slg 

3 > 

00 ^ 

0 © 8 

<£ > 0 
0 3 0 

;-E cl^ 

> "O o 

si “2 

© © 

© 8 i 

.2 S e£ 

8 2-' 5 
E — x 

8 ® 1 
o g-g 

O E o 


0 


o 

0 

a. 

E 


o 

3 

© 

c 

o 


.X 

. _ 

o 

g 

c -= © 

.2 g n 

X 
© 
o 

X . . 

o © -2 
o © £ 

-n ® — 
^ X O 

0 L_ C 
0 h -- 
o . -q 
Q- 0 •— 

2 2 g 

x © o 


© 


© 


© © 
g ©5 

Ei 

8 O 


w 

3 

o 

X 

v_ 

0 

N 

0 

SZ 

m o 

I 8 


05 g © c 

^ i 18 

« *- g © 

© © n c 

© E 5 § E 
© © .55 ca 
h sz ' - • 


© © > o 

T3 u O O 


0 C 


| i'i' 

s © s 

X o !- 
©CT© 
« i_ *5 
© © .£ 
© X 

hL © © 

o $ W 

© „ © 
X CT © 

. © >- 
(0 © o 
= © c 
x £ - 
w 8 « 
.55 . © 
® x © 

ro © 3 

E >,3 


-o © 
© g 
© x 

5 I 
© 5 
X © 

o 
c c 
— © 

O 05 
X t 

o © 
o .£ 


© 

© _. 

P 

o © 

>_ £ 
O ~ 

©" ° 
o c 
c .2 

1 f 

8 1 
E x 


C o 
o >- 

X © 
© X 

°> E 
2 z 


CM 

CM 

X 

CD 


CO 

CM 

CL 

OQ 




5-22 











Mitigation Monitoring Program for the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 


& 
03 = 

£ .o 
o? 

c © 

o ©- 
S 03 

2 05 

cc 


T3 

C 

co 

d 

_i 

CO 

o 

d 

cc 2 

UJ -1 
U- CD 


c r> 
co 

2 © 
j .® 

CO © 

r-r 0 

05 

-JI m 
CO ™ ^ 

o © m 
- £ (/> 
o o © 

CC -o S 
UJ c © 
CL CO C 


CD 

3Z CJ 
<.o 
CD C 
O O 

c = 
CO co 

O 05 

c ; 

05* 

d 


< 

o 

UJ 

o 


JE c .—. 

5 s = 

8 §>« 

_jmO 


< 

o 

UJ 

o 

© c ^ 

3 §5 is 

-J w O 


co 

05 


32 

o 

o 

CO 

'co 

o m 

jD ^ 

Ei 

un 

If 

£ cm 

•o ^ 
<D r 
£ © 
C O' 

© 03 
£ c 
c .2 
2 © 
5 8 

> ? 
co £ 

^ o5 
w © 

05 -Q 

g o 
>- £ 
© co 

CO CL 

5 i© 

© c 
Z co 


C/5 

§2 
= o 
CO O 
£ 5 

§ © 
Q. XX 

CO g 

C/5 

£ 05 


8 . 2 " 
co j§ 

C/5 O 
05 

£ 05 

i .2 

CD © 
o ro 

if 

£ 2 L 

E o 
o 
o 


32 

O c 

i 8 

O co 
E CD 
CD -£ 

£ > 
ci-l 

CO © 
© © 

8 2 
O CO 
05 _ 
C CO 

- 2 
c o 


©> cO 


c 

g 

o 


CD 

XX 


C/5 

C/5 

O 

L_ 

o 


03 


05 2 


£ o 

05 CD 
•2 8 

8-2 
5 •& 

— £ 
o CD 
o _ 
■O 


_c *•- 

5= C/3 

o i5 

o £ 
o 

2 o 

~0 CD 
CD 2= 
ID CD 


O 

c 
CD 

CD 

_ £ 
O ~ 
o 
> 


o 2, 
o Z 


CD CD 

*E 


t; o .•= 


CO 


CL 

= 5 


° 2 
-° s 

O 05 

_§ © 
f X 3 
0 0 ° 
JC C 

®! 
C T3 

Jli 

© ... 03 
C O > 
= 05 £ 

2 'o' ® 
Q- 2 xd 

Q.Q- 05 
05 05 C 

£ £ 1 
= >a 
© jq q. 
05 "O 
C 05 
” 05 — 
"O 03 = 

n 2 co 

O O 05 

3 05 c 

co .© £ 
?«° 
co ° o 
r- -2 o 
^ © £ 
o ro © 
Z g E 


■o 

05 

"cO 8 
05 2 

© ° 
_l 05 

|S 

ll 


xx c 


CD 


. xr 
^ o 
.2 x: 

2 3 

O ^ 

05 « 

© co 
C CL 

fi- 

c © 
o > 

05 O 

g E 

a £ 

05 ^ 

2 ® 
O jc 

S « 

5 .2 
CD O 

is 

© 2 
> 2 
< £ 


C/3 

t: 

0 

> 

D 

O 

0 

0 

> 

O 

v_ 

0 

p 

3 

O 

JZ . 
0 "O 
"D ^ 

0 O 
O cc 
»- 

5 i 

— i 
£ >_ 

® "O 
£ c 
a5 => 

ts 
0 
® 3 

— Q5 

05 x: 

It 

C/5 o 
C £ 

>.jS 

X5 = 


© 

C 

o 

•O 

© 05 
X2 05 

"O 3 

3 £ 

o 3 

il 

© .£, 


g 

O © 

3 2 
o cz 

^ * 


0 

3 

O 

0 


0 0 
-P. ^ 


T3 vl/ 

o 
o 
o 
0 


Cl 

0 

0 

C 

c 

0 

CC 


c 

-E 
o cr 

■t; 03 
2 £ 
S o 

8 © 
■- ^ 

c £ 

c 3 
o © 

= O 

o c 
© © 
"O 

8 o 

O 8 
(J © 


cd-2 

c . 
x: cd 
o © 

r— 

o © 

£ -o 

m © 
© N 

£ © 
o 8 

i © 

8 s 


w 


rs o 


T3 C 
© O 
W O 


© 

■*— 1 

© 

Ql 

E 
o 
o 

o 

Q. 

E 
© 

© 

© 

2 3 
g o 

t| 

2! 

t: £ 

ii 

- O) 
C C 

iS E 

^ 8 
cc © 

o3 J= 

s E 
O © 
© 2 


c 
© 
© 

E o O 
2 o © 

iff 

E -2 o 

Jr o 

© © o 
©• w 

05 i_ r- 
£ © O 
w S 'f= 

05 © O 

O © © 

is- 

Eo ® 

N — C3 
0 03 

© ® 
© 
c 


X3 

i— 

0 

0 


C 

0 


.2 O 
03 ♦- 

g iS < 
f O £ 

1 §.€ 
°o® 

3 o 1 


ro 

co 

sz 

t: 

o 


E 

k_ 

< 

CO 
Z) cc 


c 

0 

0 

0 

> 


.© c 
© o 

CD = 
t «£ 

o ’ —^ 
2 < E 

c< 2 
oM^ 

— © 
O C -o 

•O © o 
® E O 

- 2 i 

CD ©I 

a < o 

O § X5 
§ = C 
> © © 

Ufl« 
© < u_ 
S -o ra 

E © "c 

2 e o 

c 8 © 
o £ O 

CO 03 
x: 

c -2 o 
© £ 
o X2 o 
£ o © 

1 §§ 

O 


0 
O 0 


C 

0 

§ ® 
S’ © 
8 E 

© c 

E o 

-t; 

V) C 
© © 
JQ > 
© 
© lx 

s °- 

£ c 
C O 
© = 
E S 
© o 
CL CL 

-§ © 
£ © 
85 

§ E 
f o 
m w 
x: S 

8 i 

2 05 
. © 
O s 

u. o 
Q © 
O Q. 


© © 

-C ■*-* 

— C -t; 
JC © © 

•S E © 
3 c © 

sfs 
Is ® 

8 ° .2 
© c o 

© 05 O 

<— E 

- £ © 
© © o 

>- Q. O 
© © _ 

© Q < 

g CD 
0 O n 

5=o 
£ < > 

O jjj CC 

g - o 

© O © 

£ © £ 
X C T3 
W © C 

Q- e © 
Q- © >. 
CL £ £ 

5 8-8 
“20 


© 

© 

■o 

© 

LL 


© 

O 

c 

ro 

T5 

k _ 

o 

8 a 

© C 

- E 
© © 
X5 £ 

s 8 

=> © 


w E 

? © 
- Q. 

w _ 

© co 
2 ° 
o £ 

>>o 
S c 

o cO 

X3 


© £ 
g co 


© 
o 
© 
CD J 


8 2 
8 f 

3 i 

05 

d 


< 

o 

UJ 

O 


c 

© ^ 
o = 
£ w 

C C/5 
05 £ 

d o 


< 

o 

UJ 

o 

c 

0 — 
o = 
it= 0 
c 0 

03 0 

c f.) O 


o 

0 

Q- 

E 


0 a) 

I § 

3 © 

u. O 
© -O 

© 3 
3 o 

T3 O 

1.1 

“1 
0 f/\ 

0 2 
c o 

05 O 

£ 05 


CO "o £ £ 


© 

05 

>_ © 

£ E 
© © 

3 -o 

■E? 

w © 

© § a 
£ -2 © 
f.2 ^ 

© ? © 
o © © 
cl — g 

E © 

> © 
© © x: 


© 

x: £ 

03 © c - 

o O .2 


© 


T3 

© 

W 

© 

© 

i— 

o 

© 

•O 


o c 
cr © 

© e 


E 
ro 
© 

>* _ £ 


■o 
000 
xj _ © 

© o “ 
■ 5 : X= o 

5 ro © 
g o w 

© =8 © 
0 x *— 

-i: O o 
0 E £ 


c 0 
D 0 . 

€ §J8 
3 go 

"0x3© 
© CD £ 
« > © 

28 
o w 
c 


© 
o 
c 
o 

boo 


E 

o 2 
.2 | 
o .2 05 

2 E H 

l|g 

v- o t 
O 8 -Q 

CD© ~ 

£ £ o 
EE© 

©f 1 

g O £ 


C « 

o >- 
= © 
© XD 

, 2 > E 

£ O 


*o- 

in 

CM 

CM 

CL 

CL 

CD 

CO 

Z 

z 


5-23 











Mitigation Monitoring Program for the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 


& 
o> = 
9 n 
o '« 

l— 

c ° 

2 0 
2 a) 
X 


« 

0 

-> 0 

I 2 

CO ® 

o ® 

C-j 03 

—I cO 

W v. > 

o ® 0 

- 2 co 

O o “ 
x -o 

tu c 
U- CO 


co 

ai 

o 

CD 

c 


*0 

c 

CO 

d 

_l 

0) 

o 

d 

x ^ 

LU _) 
LL CO 


TO 

c 

CO 

d 

_l 

CO 

o 

d 

CE 2 
HI -I 
LL CO 


CD 

o 

<*- 


CD C 

o o 

C 'D= 
CO CO 
O CD 


c ■ 

03- 

CO 


< 

O 

LU 

o 

|I= 

c u — 
= «E 0 

w E w 
® 03 ® 
-J « O 


< 

O 

LU 

o 

5 c ^ 
CO CO = 

£ .9 
= 2 co 
® F w 

S §)« 

_J co O 


< 

o 

LU 

o 

Hi 

■ U 


CO 

CO 


rx F co 
£ O) « 
_J co O 


0 

CO 

0 

.c 

©‘ 

c 


co 

O) 


C _J 
co < 
2 CD 
0-2 


O 

Q. 

CO 

CD 

CO 

CO 

c 

CO 

E 

;g 

3 

o 

$ 


CO 

c 
o 

CO 
CO 
CD 

_ w 
O C 
J_ — 
-O 
CD 
U 

0 

CL 

0 

CO 


2 o 
o « 

O T3 

11 

ffl 2 

2 o 
. **— 
co ® 
c -Q 
g *o 


CD 

"co 
E 

= 20 
« o £ 


o 

CO 

c 
o 

CO 
> 
o 

2 Q- 


o 
•a > 

■o 2 
CD E 

-C CD 

co »- 

CO CD 

g -Q 

2 "55 

■o 13 

2 E 

g2 

o — 

■s 2 

.c co 

E ®" 

0 03 

CD 


CO 

8 ® 

DC o 

O Q- 

iS. 

if 


CD 


"O 

CD 

* 0 

•E .sE. 

a ® 3 

CO 7:3 

O) c 

CD 

9- E 


c 

CO 


n CO O a 


CD 


03 O 
CD 


3 £ 

05 n 

0 .2 


° ^ 
0 3 


■I 3 

c "O 
•|2 § 
m co 2 
“ ® « 
i « §• 

m 0 


O 

0 

C 

0 

E 

0 


0 •— 
C 


3 

cr 

0 


0 


*o 

0 - 
0 O 
3 ‘ 

O’ 

0 
v_ 

0 
C 

o 

CO 
> 
o 


0 0 
o 


£3 

O CD 

•c ^ 

O CD 
CL -O 


CD CO 
CO 0 
CO = 
CD 9 

.c 2 

CO "O 
CO *0 
5 CO 
>. CD 
2 0 
Q o 

Q. 

if 

ll 

9>-C 
2 9 

=d-0 

n g 


CL 

CD CD 5 
3 

o 


c .c 


*13 O 

cr w 

CD co co 

>- CD cO 

co -C co 

■o 


CO 


§ 

c co ~ 
ffl ® 2 
g> '5. E 


CD 

>- CO 
O C 

(D 9 

jd .tr 

2 T3 2 

ra p 
CO c ® 

> to a 

c 2 ra 
CD CO O 

5>o o 

< Q.-Q 

®b = 

£ o ^ 

o ■- o 
O CO 


CO 

CD 

■O CD 
3 

IS 

II 

^ CO 
• CD 

C *- 

co >, 

E ^ 

/N CO 

O « 

O ra 


co ~ 

•— CO 


E’-c co 2 


r= CO 
O C 
C Q. O 
b co o 


CO 


r a CO 
a ^co 
Q- co 
rr co cO 

LL CO V- 
o3 CD ® 
^ UtJ 
“ CD CD 
O C LL 


g 2 
8 N 

2 i 

3 C 

ii 

.2 o 
2 c 75 

co c 


^ co 

T3 CD 
C — 
CO g 
CO — 
CD = 
■^= Q- 

U= CO 

O CO 

co 

;2 
CD C 
CO CD 

2 S 

« CD 
T3 x: 
c *- 
co 

CO 
CD 


CO 


CD c 

co as 

§ 3 

CO Q3 
03 2 


= >. C 


>» 
o 
c 

CD , 
2* =« 
CD « 
c 9 


co 

CD 


CD 

E 

CL 

3 

C 

co 


C.U 

S<oc®2 


CL 
3 

> § 
o 2 

CO CD 


~ 2 CO .9 

CD 
DC 


c 

o 

> 

CO 


O) <D 

2 <5 

CD T3 

3 CD 

03 E 
2 E 

C? 

o -c 

ra 2 
O or 

2 £ 


c -o 
2 5 
E ro . 

O c 
O ® 
Ql E 
g. 

3 

cr 

CD 


> co" 

CO i_ 
C 3 
O T3 
0 


o — 

St 

CL CO 


8l 

2 Z 

Q. 03 
CD± 
c *- 
co 

CO CO 
O LU 


sS i 

a. co ? 


o "O 

Q § 

Q . 

X « 

2 § 
z O 
® c 

2- ® 

CO o 

I 

2 03 
'« E 

■O < 

2 2 

co < 

Q. - 

£ o5 

> 

co a: 

|-§ 

CO CO ■c; 

"XT' *_ 0 

&% 

O CD 


0 C 
£ ““ 

to" (8 
0 ir 
o 

0 O 

s-s.- 

d*: = ro 

1“ 

5 ® i 

— a. 

c a 

0 Q 
0 C 

u. £ 0 

0 0O 
«- 0 
3 CL 
O O 
? 0 
2 > 
2 0 
CO "O 

O ■D CO 
r- C 0 
« 0 ^ 
0 


0 
I- 

2 0 
■O 3 
0 = 

b 03 
o »- 


X 

0 

T3 

C 

0 

Z' 

z 


■o 
0 

JC 
% ? 


j2 § '5* 

f 

2-8 2 


0 2 


c 
o 
E 

T3 
C 

® ■$ 

T3 *- 

Q) 

o § 
| 0 

§ -o 
° 0 
0 c 

-Q ~ 

2 2 
3 Z 
O 0 

*Z 

0 CD 

I a 
0 0 
0 2 
o ® 

N 

El 

= c 


® 0 
£ g 
■o 2 

S2 

CO 0 _ 

2 -o c 

3 -O 2 

■O 3 E 
goo 

§ g ° 


— 2 
CL CO C 

c£S 

2 co 0 

0 2® 
O 3 2 

0 2 
o o 
o-c 

Q- 03 
- 

o 

35 
o 


o 

c 

> 
o 
c 

m C 

^5 o3 
Q) 


"D 

C 

03 

C 

o 


z 2 O 2 z 


■o 
c 
0 
CL 
Q 

D El 


CO 
0 
-Q 

"l_ 

O 

0 = 
<D o 


c 

o 

*D 

C 

03 

JD 

03 


03 

0 

0 

0 

O 

0 

c 

0 


~o 

0 

o 


0 

JD 


0 


C 
0 0 
> > 
*X= 0 

03 CD 

i= £ 

° c= 
o .E 


13 

O 

0 

JO, . 
0) 


30 
O 0 
q.2 


■O 

c 

0 0 

o ■% 
cr o 
LU 2 

LL l. 


0 


i: 0 
2 £ 


® .1 
c 2 

— CD 
TO Q. 
0 O 

18 

£ x 

0 g 

O 0 


T3 
D 
O 
£ 

0 

’0 C 


O) 

C 

*k_ 

■o 


0 


co £ 


n —• 
LL -7-i 


tr o 

C TO 
O 0 
•D= W 

g > 
2 ® 

® 0 

O o 
o Zj 
0 CO 

o o 
'55 ® 
CD 2 


0 0 

2 0 

w g 
£ 0 

3 .C 
"O ‘ 
0 C 

O CO 

ag 

c 

0 3 
0 O 
® 6 
•o ® 
c 2 
® 0 
C ^ 

o c 
0 
o > 
0 0 


£ 

o 

0 

m c 

8-2 

S 03 

o 

z ^ 

03 

CO 


< 

o 

LU 

o 

c 

0 

9 “ 
2 « 
c co 

03 0 

in o 


< 

O 

LU 

O 

C 

0 ^ 
O = 
itz 0 
c 0 

03 0 

CO O 


< 

o 

LU 

o 


c 

0 ^ 
9 = 
2 co 
c 0 

03 _0 

in o 


■o 

o 

o 


o 

0 

Q. 

E 


c ^ 
w o 2 
c 'i= 

2 3 
Q-2 
■O 0 
o c 
o o 

?= CJ 

c 0 9 
- c 0 

*0—0 
0 0 0 
0 0-3 
® Q. CO 

^ 03 

f*S 

(Odd 


0 
3 
O 

*o 
0 0 


c - 2 


o 

-p 

3 


0 0 

g "O 

0 ® 

JD 33 

2 O 

8 « 2 

0 = 


0 


o 

—" 9 
o ’ 


0 

0 

0 0 

0 <c 

C O 

0 p 


0 ® 0 
— 2 0 
c p g 
0 


0 

0 0 


“XT rrt CO 




O 


CO r: 

® i 8 

Is a 


3 E 2 

03° 3 g 

~ ® % 0 

0 03 2 o 

3 0 0 0 

I 2 8 3 
x 0 ^ 0 


0 

E 

E 


o 0 

o ® 
O E 

® S 

0) 

egg 

2 = g 

O CL o 

CL 0 TO 


0 


C 

o o 

a = 

2 ° 
£ j= 

03 ® 
0 0 
■° 3 
© O 

o< 
2 >, 
ai 

X 3 

0 cr 


^ © 
0 *b 
o 9 
o g 


E 

o 

U 

2 ^ 

E; 3 
5 co 
5- ^ 

cr »- 

03 -q 

§ 1 

0 CD _j 

0 0 = 

0 -g 0 

.9 ® 2 

X 03 O 

2 o 0 


Z Q > 

OQ~ 

CD -£ X 
0 0 ° 
2 2 0 

^30 

•|g ® 
0 0 


3 

o 

I 

o 

03 


t CO 
•§03-0 
O 

S8| 

2 o E 


c 

*- © 

® tr 

iS § 

0 2*0 

— c c 
00 b 

0 -2 i» 

o «i 

C c *c 
0 0 "O 

*^o 

® g ® 

E = co 

«rf CT3 

j: o) © 

< x £ 


p 
3 
0 O 
DC O 

2l 

2 E 

>> 03 


P = 

Q 


o 

£ 

> c 
g 0 

O £ 

> 2 

® o 


T3 

0 

-0 >- 
0 ° 
> 2 

© 

03 E 
2 ® 


Si 

® S3 

2 © 

as 

IS 


= Q. 


TO 

•E • 03 


0 ~ — 
0 *- 
*o o 


0 -c 


3 .i" 


O — — 


_ >. 

>-jQ SL C 
— 0 
-X *o 


c c 

O 3 
0 O 


0 


o 

0 _ 
>- 0 

b g 


0 *F 

2 5 


= 90 

2 S 
0 


E 2 


o © o 

j2 ^ z 

o 
o 


0 = 
2 Z 


c ® 

•8 © 

0 -Q 

.2> E 

•- 3 


CD 


00 

C*5 

CM 

CM 

CM 

X 

X 

X 


m 

X 

m 

X 

z 

z 

z 

< 


5-24 












Mitigation Monitoring Program for the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 


& 

03 = 

£ S 

i’s 

§ §- 
.2 w 
*2 © 
CC 


to 

c 

© 

d 

—i 

CO 

o 

o 

cc 2 

LU _l 
LL CO 


TO 

TO 

c 

c 

03 

03 

d 

d 

_i 

_i 

w 

CO 

o 

o 

d 

d 

cc s 

cc s 

LU _J 

LU -I 

LL CD 

LL CD 

< 

< 

o 

o 

LU 

LU 

o 

o 


© 

e o 

<r,- 

© c 
o o 

C -iz 
© © 
O CD 

C ; 

g>* 

CO 


< 

O 

UJ 

o 


p © = 

£ o — 

© c © 

S §3™ 

_T© O 


5 c — 
5 3 = 

© 3 © 
© CD™ 
—I CD O 


5 c 

I 8 = 

© 3 © 
© 03™ 
-J W O 


© 

r- © 

.2 O 


© 

03 


© ™ 
5s: 

© rr 
© LL 

H - o3 

.2 ^ 

© o 

oo w 
O 

■o .E 

© 

_ © 

© o 
w 
o © 
© ® 

C £ 

85 

to 3 


© © 
~ © 
© CO 

t§ 

SS 

^ 03 

cc 5 

O rr 

CQ £ 

© O 

— 03 

jc ^ 

1 | 
c i- 
.2 c 

4-* • — 

c -c 

TO O 


© 
13 

= -o 


© 5 

o 

© o 

c 


© 

13 

° £ 

o § 

© t 

o © 
.2 © 
E § 

v © 
2 -c 
Q-t- 
w 

o $ 

© © 

CD CO 

o v- 
O m 
lO > 
‘ © 
sz 
o 2 

|1 

o o 

> 3= 

= E 

© 

_ © © 

.2 © .c i= 


o 

o 

o 


© 
03 
CD 03 

_ c c 

= =S o 


3 

o 

5 

03 

© 

o 

E 

© 

ir 

o 

o 

c 

TO 

c 

© 

©" 

Q. 

Q_ 

© 

£ 

03 1 

C © 


£ C 

© 2 c 

™ ■© - 

—J 4—' 

— CO 

HI >_ 

CO o 


CD O © 


03 

~ © 
03 © 


© 


O — 

c 


© 


^ to 

c © 

I 8 

Z 03 


- 03 
^ CD 
(f) *- 

I 5 
© © 
Q. © 


OT 

1 - 

TO © 

o © 
5 Q. 


3 5 
© © 


© 
O -C 
1_ 

CL O 

to o 

£ © 
© TO 
TO 

= © 


— © 
© W 

£ © 

If 

-V o 

m 03 

2 © 
£ D 
-*—» d 
CO CD 

2 5 
>>10 

© 2 

.2 £ 

© c 

© > 
o > 

"O 

>, a) 
*o "o 


CL 

© E 
c o 
ra Q 

E 03 

2 © 

•*- 13 

to c 

© © 

St 

© UJ 
o 5 

© O 

© 3 
5 c 

£ O 

| . 2 . 

TO 

C © 

•2 -o 
© © 
CO g 

©£ 


© 

c 

~ O 

° s 

© _ .© 

t- © 1_ 

© 13 © 

c n E 
o 3 < 
o = 
5 < 


© 


CD 


8 © 


© 

£2 


© ^ © 
0.5^ 
E r. 3 

O 03© 
©CO 
© 
sz 


CD 2 

© .2 


>- © 

© 03 


3 O © - 

o © ' “ 
2 © 

5 © 

.© 03 

© .2 i c 
co .9. >> o 


© ro 

© o 


JC a. 

"2 "o 
5 c 
z © 


m © 
O 03 
C 'C 
© .1= 


© < .!= 
5 . o 

03 © © 

.2 c 5 

.© O o 
X 

© 2 - 5 
c 8 ■© 
© c © 

© S’ 

. 21 5 
©If 8 

CO < b 


© © 
© © 

£2 2 

.tr -C 

§ ~ 

-= CD 

5 .E 

© ts 
© © 
— 1 v_ 

Q © 

© **• 

£2 _• 

2 © 
« C 
© © 

= c 
ra © 
.2 .© 
© © 

2 E 
2 < 
■o -i 

o © 
O S 

i e 

^ O 
03 ‘ 


ll 

.2 o 

o % 
© 
o 
■> 
© 
TO 


© 

c 

© 

O 

c 

© 


© 

N 

E 

c 

E 

o 


T3.2 © 
(— - 1 - 1 

© iS p 

o 

QC 

LU 


c 

.2 ~ ^ 
Jr © © 
2 Q. w 

Is 8 

= T3 © 
< >, c 
© 03 03 

£ © © 

E c © 

o LU © 

c . E? 

v- 03 © 
O © " 
CD 

f? o "o 

© © 03 
CD c .E 

© .2 3 

-© ra ■o 

CD *o 

I §>. 


8 o 

O © 

.2 £ 

o 
© 


CD 

© of 
fin 

i- 03 

© 5= 

© TO 

5 S • 

© 03 

° £ © 


£p.©!i 

-> 03 > *•— ^ 


03 
CL 

© 2 o 

«= Q. CO 

•O c 
3 © 

1 % 


©s 

CD “ 


O 

C/3 


03 C 
CD O 

© _ 
o 
© 
C3_ 
W 


tr 
2 Q 


= © 


cr q. 

55 

© © 
Q. £ 

o o 

W 

c © 
© © 
E 


= TO 
- C 


o 

CD 
h: TO 


© TO 
CD © 
£2 .2 
■C © 

o s 

Z o 


© Q -2 5 

.a y a. © 

TO 


5 o 


“ E = 

© © ra 

© i: 
13 O 


C TO 

2 © - 

2 © 

■ir u 

C © —I 
O O CD 

© co 5 
o O - 
© © S 

CD £ § 


O © TO 
tz - 03 
^ TO c 
C © = 


erf 

© c 
© 


TO 

© 


V) 

© 

L_ 

d 

CO 

03 

CD 

E 

c 

o 

© 

03 

I 

© 


CO 

oo 

CL 

CD 


- © c 
Stic 

TO -= © 

8 02 
o § © 


«? 
ro ro 
CD in 

c w 
c Sc 

O CD 


© 

o 

© 

? c 


S vw 
2 .5> 


c ■ 

03 

CO 


< 

O 

LU 

o 

c 

© ^ 
2 = 
£ w 

c 2 
03 © 

CO O 


< 

o 

LU 

o 

c 

© 

2 — 
£ v) 
c w 

03 © 

in O 


< 

O 

LU 

o 

c 

© ^ 
2 — 
£ w 

c 2 
03 © 

co O 


© 

8 © 
TO 3 

o £ « 


t Q "O © 


© 


o 

ro 

CL 

E 


CD 
© O 


O CD 
© © 

1 = 

T3 O 

£ 

> i 

© © 


© 5 

-1 

■B I 

W 

© O 
2 c 

« o 

B o 
© E 
2 © 
TO <d 

f— 


*o 

s 2 

03 ^3 
CD 2 

© 3- 
w cr 

o © 

E o 

© © 

© £ 
£ ™ 
© >> 

i © 
■§ © 
©5 


TO 

o 3 
© o 

03 O 


585 

o © © 
.2 5 c 

^ CD © 

© © w 

i: = O 

I- o S 


© © 
© 


TO 

C 

© 

s *♦— 

2 o 

11 
© © 
E § 

© © 
© © 
E 

03 0) 
CD -C 


00 co 


CD 

o 

1_ 

o 

o 

CD 

© 


-2 xj 


w 

i ■© 

^ © 


P =r 


JT .1= 


2 o © 2 


© 

o 

cr 

£ 

co 

o 

c 

> 

CD 

O 

CD 


So- 
© 8 o 
> O ~ 

O V) 

_ 

03 5 03 


03 

3 

cr 


CD 

£ 

^ TO 
O CD 
CO ^ 
Q_ CO 

E 

o 

TO W 
3 03 


o 

03 

Q- 

E 


to o 
£ © 

^ I ^ 

is 8 

h- W O 


©5 

2 « 
•2 TJ 
o © 

-t E 

c g 
o 

O w 


© 

© 

5 >. 

c c 
•2 § 

© « 
© .© 
03 TO 
© O 

> -0 
T3 © 

© | 
© S 
3t= © 

? ~ 
5 o 


CD 

© £ 

£ § 

*“ 

13 © 

TO .2 
© © 


« 


« .bf- 
O Q. 
O TO 
© £ 


c * 
o >- 
*= © 
© 13 

.2> E 
•— o 


03 

CM 

0. 

CO 


CC 

< 


o 

CO 

0. 

CD 


5-25 












Mitigation Monitoring Program for the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project _____ 

Mitigation Significance Before Significance After Monitoring 

Number 3 Impact b Mitigation b c Mitigation Measure b Mitigation b ' c _ Responsibility 

WETLANDS 


0} 

0 


3 0 
J .2 
CO ® 
CD 
CD 
CO 


O 

_l 

CO _ 

O ffl 5 
- £ 0 
O o g 

I u o 

me® 

U. CO c 


< 

O 

LU 

o 


c 

CO 

-C 



co 


CD 


S ® 

e-; 

8§ 

£ <= 
5 ° 

CO -4= 
- o 

5 ® 
_c0 co 

Q_ CO 

ccm 
°a <=> 
lO 
o £ 

co CC 
■- O 
£ co 

g £ 
(D "O 

-c 5 
"O co 
co ^ 

I | 

co o 

CD 

m w 


CD 

■Q <D 
£ £ 

§ c 
co .2 
"O 


CO § 


CD 
CO 
3 
CO 
o 
CD 

- 

c 3 -o 

^0 »- c 
0 £ 

> O § 


CO 

CO 


CD 
Q. 0 
0) O 


"O 5= 

J E 
5 = 'co 

If 

CD c 
C >> 
CC 0 


0 0 
0 
O 
0 
c 


JZ — 

. 9 * 0 

i- <D 

0 .9 
£ 0 
0 . 9 - 

0 CL 

11 0 
0 2= 


go 
c 
0 


0 

CO 


C 3 
o CO 
O 0) 


CO _ 

O 0 

H— 

tr 

0 o o 
O w ' 
>. © 


"O ^ 


_ O 

= o © 
§ co o 


c 

E - 
E cl 

0.0 
-O $ 

-O O 

3 •o 
o .tr 

*1 
■o £ 

JO a) 

© "co 
5 0 


€ o 

O "O 

Z 2 
® 

0 


0 0 
> > 


0 
£ 
0 
0 

C 0 
0 0 


■O 

c 

0 

0 


O) 

c 

'c 

0 

■c 

0 

Q. 

CO 

0 

k_ 

0 

0 

0 

0 

E 

c 

o 


0 

0 


o 

o 


JO ® 

r° 

0 
O 

E 
0 

-C c 
o z 

^ § 
0 

0 O 
0 TJ 

E g 


CO 

D 

o 

■O 

k_ 

0 

N 


0 

£ 

0 


C C 
£ 

i| 

>. w 

S 0 

o 

? 2 
2 05 

o) .E 
*- 0 
0 X 

j= ® 

CO 


° m 
0 

C O 

o - 


o 

0 ;_r 
o O) 

O £ 


0 0 

c ■& 
0 CL 


c 

lc 


., c 

^ £ 


0 


0 

> 


0 O " 

o 

T ~ 


£?’o 

0 


~ O 
0 
o 


0 _ 
0 £ O 

g § “ 

o 

o o ‘~o 
+L O O 
-C *7 *C 
0)0 0 
■C i— Q. 


0 

_ > 

0 0.. 
0)— -C 

§1 ? 
3 O 
2 o) 

Z 05 O 
*00 
o 
E 
o 

l_ 

Q. 
O 


^ « 0 


. . 
O) 0) 

0 ?-o 

*- R 

■■^5 -0 

lo i § 

g 5 .2 E 

0 0 

If 

£ ® 
^ J 3 

05 0 

n — 

EDO 

C T 3 

CO 

n 3 c 

•O O 

0 g> 

2 0 

E ® 

Z £ 

f E ® 

Q. 03 ^ 

3 £ 
CT-g 

2 1 

0 2 
CO 0 

• 

• 


° "O 

II 

o 

T“ 

— 2 
0 -c 

P w 
E 0 

0 2 

CL 0 

§-.E 
0 = 
^ o 
0 

O 3 

C 0 

.2 o) 
0 .£ 

O) >> 

0 “ 
£ O 

CD "o 

0 c 
0 5 

? 0 
.E x: 

11 


0 

> 

CO ... 
g CO 
0 .2 


E dr£ 

Q- c o 

D u <0 

CT 0 C 
0 0 O 
C O *= 

o o 

o o O 
3 ■*- 0 
£■=<!> 
0 0 >- 

Sc 73 

8 s S 


— O 


0 n 
E c 
o co 
0 ■ - 
= T 3 
O 0 
0 N 

wll 
0 0 ® 
> ♦= 0 
0 0 

5 0 
0 


TO 

c 

3 

O 

t _ 

0 

0 

0 


0 


c f 

E -D - 

Q. 0 0 
3 P 


0 

‘v_ 

CL 

O 

Cl 

Cl 


° $ 


c - g* 

O -H- = 
•^3 C = 

00^: 

IP 

0 CT C 

SZ 0 o 


0 
_ 0 
.2 8 
C CO 

0 -Q 


0 

X 3 

O 

C 

c 

0 

o 


■f ^ 
0 
O 

c 

0 

-Q 

k. 

O 

CO 

ID 

O 

0 

£ 

0 

k_ 

c 

o 

o 

o 

k_ 

V) 

c 

o 

o 


0 


•s .c 
I o 


0 ^ 
0 


0 

c 


0 c o 
0 E <e 
0 ® -O 
c cl c 

0 3 0 
C 05 O) 
_ C c 

« ’3 3 
: 5 <§ g 

erg g 


0 


c 

o 

0 

k_ 

o 

o 

O) 

£ co 

N ID 

6 0 
E I 


< 

O 

LU 

o 


c 



O) 0 

co o 


0 

X 5 


JC 3 
— O 

O ^ 
0 
2 "P 

0 C 
CL 0 

.i? 

0 c 
E 0 


c ~ 


c 

o 

(D 


0 

E 


0 £2 


0 0 -rj 
r- Li 

® £ 
O) o 

> ■£ 
Q.T3 2 

■p 0 O 

^30 

?.|a 

H° 

o 

eS z 

0 CO 0 


■D 

c . 
0 >% 


o 


O 05 
0 C 
X5 '^= 

S 2 

0 0 ?E£ 

0 0 g 


II 

c O' 


0 


05 


0 


O 
0 
CL 

c E 


0 
■C c 

H a. 


CD ® ^ 

£ 0 0 


c 5 
0 "O 

o § 

0 05 

9 o 
Q. 2 
0 


800 

2- o "V 
o co o 

CLt- 

O E < 

c 8 • 

^ = 
E 0 0 


0 ^ 
0 c 
*- o 
2 '0 

II 

o 
o o 

? c 

5 8 
o 0 

■O 
0 
c 
0 


■O 

c 

0 

0 


0 C 

X 5 2, 
3 S> 

O ® 

0 E 


-O CD 
0 1 
f E 
S’-S 

< *o 


E o 


0 


0 


« CL 

iS 
0 — 
E £ 


0 

0 


0 


3 . 
o 0 

5 o 
0 0 

If 

P 0 


O (5 
co 5 


O 0 


0 


-o 0 
< < £ 


CO 

CL 

CO 


5-26 

















5-27 
















c 

o 

o 


in 

ID 

_J 

CO 

< 


c 

o 

'35 

c 

(0 

Q. 

X 

LU 

ffl 

c 

"53 

o. 

Q. 

.s. 

'ra 

CD 


E 

ra 

k_ 

cn 

o 


05 

c 


c 

o 

o 

(a 

o> 


& 
05 = 

E -Q 

s'S 

1 - 

2 ffl 

cc 


0 ) 

OX o 
<i 
ffl C 
O O 
c = 

CO CO 
O O) 

‘i »2 

CO 


a 3 
CD 


0 ) 

k— 

o 

0 ) 

m c 

8.2 

S -f 
Is 

05 

CO 


«o 
— E 
52 o © 
- S5 to 
9 - ffl 

, 2 a 

m 2 S, 

»- x: 05 

*— co 

05 C 
•" CO 


O „ 


o 

co 

Q. 

O 


c 

'o ±- 
ffl [O 
CL CO 
£ O 

"2 oo 

II 

O CO 

ffl 2 
i= o 
CD 2 
£ c 
tl O 
05 o 

•2 c 
= o 


C/5 

C/5 

o 

CD 

.C 

£ .2 
c c 
0 CD 

s ° 

O Q_ 

(0 r- 

So 

05 co 


o 

k_ 

0 

O 


II 

.c co 
o ^ 

00 = 
V .2 

o v. 


C CD 


= .“P 


o « 
co 2 

■° ffl 

2 § 
‘tz o 
0 0 ) 

ffl - 
Q. CD 

^2 
if) if) 
<D 0 

5 — fc_ 


cl'c § 

© c 5 
2 © © 

« 1 ! 
ffl O Q. 

05 Q. E 
c — 
'co !2 2 

0 0 3 
CD O O 

^ -S 

co 0)22 
xi c £ 
!= = CO 

2 .£ c 

W Jr O 

— E c 
0-22 
CO CD 


■t; E o « 


c 

8 2 
£ 2 
co o 

S 5 

•— x: 

CO O 


C/5 q CD 

co 2 a) 

CD £ C/5 

;= cd i_ 
® £ O 

.1 OT 
n CD CO 
2-x: ffl 
-E o 


03 


0 


3 

jC 

if) 

if) 

if) 

0 

C 

3 

CJ) 

E 

0 

00 

> 

if) 

c 

.2 . 

-i’r 

.!= CO 

Q. CL 
O T5 

.2 cd 

5= £ 

CO TO 
5 ffl 
c co 


I 8 


■O 
c 
co 

ffl 

2 cr 

3 °3 
.2 2 
050 
ffl « 

.2 © 
a! 
8 2 

to! 
2 o 
o 5 
ffl > 
Q. ffl 

E 'ffl 

O CD 
O _ 


t c 
ffl — 
C/5 -o 
ffl CD 
"O = 


Q- ~ 


c ® 
O 2 

■4-^ u _ 

O — 

ffl _ 

E s 

o o 

O ffl 
W. Q. 

2 E 

05 8 

1 2 

CD 2 
—■ > 
■o ffl 

2 ^ 
.to ffl 


o ffl 

C/5 

■O o 

ffl Q. 
CD C/5 

Q.’O 

W 05 


ffl 

SI 


ffl E 5 


ffl ' 


CD 


O 
O CL 
ffl 


§ 

o 


l— 

^ CD - 


c C 


= c 


0 t - ^ 


■p 
0 . 
= 0 
cn cd 


0 

c 

o 


cn — 
0 

L_ '^3 

o c 
^ 0 
TO 

8 55 
ffl <D 


ffl CC 

3 ■'t 

2 ffl 

_ ffl CD 
OT ^ «5 

'> E 

2 "o 

Q. C 
ffl « 

•o 

3 

O ffl ffl 
.2 ffl £ 


CO 
ffl 
ffl 

k_ 
0 

0 0 
0 if) 


>5 

ID 
if) 
0 
O 

c 0 

o S' 

^ ffl 

C X5 
ffl ffl 
> .2 
ffl C/5 

2 i 

2 I 

—5 

•o 2 

ffl o 
o 0 

o c/5 

w o 
Q. o 
ffl 

5 5 

e 8 

_0 O 
Q. X 

I 8 


c 
^ O 
ffl ^0 


•^2 5 

III | 

II 

8 

CD 2 

■° 8 
CO - 0 

11 

o E 

— Q. 

2 '3 
0 cr 
'F cd 
0 _ 

Q) 
0 C 
E TD 

c 2 
0 CD 

CL TO 
> 4 - C 
O 0 


CD C 
C — 

c 
o 

if) 

tl CD 
8 « 
CD 05 

^ E 
® '5 
2 P 


2 cc 
c 

-O o 
CD ^ 
O "o 

3 “O 

■o < 

c 

o 

0 T5 

s.i 


05 

Is 

J- ffl 
x: co 

5 1 05 

*- sz 
CD “ 
SZ 05 

*- c 

o 3 

c -o 
.2 c 
co ffl 

i| 

05 

> C 
ffl ffl 


-O O- 
3 2 
o 

$ .2 

05 C 

.E o 
* = 
O ffl 

c o 

o co 

E 2 

o’ o 
o| 

ffl ^ 
ffl "O 
2 ffl 
ffl — 


CO c 

— o 

C -x= 
O ffl 

2 85 

ffl 05 
05 > 
ffl ffl 
> *- 
ffl . 
>- CO 

— -O 

11 


ffl "O 
X5 C 
ffl 

2 >, 

3 .t; 
o <0 

■o 'O 
5 0 

03 £ CO 
■O 
>> c 
ffl ffl 


C\J 


© 2 


- u ; x 


3 

•o 

c 

o 

o 

05 

X5 


3 
O 
‘v_ 
CD 
0 
1 

C 

o 
c 

8^ 

5 

if) 3 

tc ^ 
o 0 

. S-' /n 




8 a 

w .2 

>E 

c 3 
O ^ 
o. c 

3 ffl 

o o 
0 ~ ffl^ 

ffl O ^ 
X2 **- m 


ffl o 3 ; 


— o 
o 2 
c ffl 

% o 

S o 


ffl © 
3 £ 

li 

05 © 
ffl -O 


-a 

© © 
05 C 

S ffl 

ffl 2 


2 

3 

o 

5 


5 ffl 05 
ffl 


© 

CO 
ffl 

o ffl 

W I 

•o ffl 
2 ffl 
« 


w © 
c > 


o 

ffl 

Q. 

E 


C « 

o >- 
© 
ffl X5 

.2>E 

~ O 


CM „ 
CO O) 

I s 


5-28 











Mitigation Monitoring Program for the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 


& 
o> — 

.£ 

o 1 
c o 
o °- 
0 ) 
cc 


co 

CO 

CO 

CD 


CO 2 

d 


C 

CD 

CD 

8 

2 CO 


CO 

CO 

CD 

o 

CD 

c 


O 

_i 

CO 

o 

TO 

c 

co 

O 

CC 

LLI 

LL 


o 

—I 

CO 

o 

TO 

c 

co 

O 

CC 

111 

LL 


to 

c 

CO 

d 

_l 

CO 

o 

d 

CC 2 
LU -J 
LL CO 


to 

C 

CO 

d 

_i 

CO 

o 

d 

a: ^ 

LU -I 
LL CO 


CD 

<^ 

CD C 
O O 
C - 1 = 
CO CO 
O O) 

* ♦— 4 ^ 

O)^ 

d 


< 

o 

LU 

o 

£ 9 ~ 
aj o >2 

_i co O 


< 

a 

UJ 

o 


a 

UJ 

o 


| S = 

© £ CO 
ffl CD™ 

—J© O 


CO 


1 Z LU 

£ <-> 

© p W 

8 o >2 

_J « O 


O 

LU 

o 

5 s = 

2 "p co 
a] cd™ 
-J co O 


< 

a 

UJ 

o 

2 ?5 = 


co 

“I ffl 

8 o>« 

_J w O 


CD 

— <D 

© £ 
C __ 


co 
CO 
CD 

1 _ 

CO 

co £ 


3 ^ 

CD O 
~ CD i 

o 8 2 . 

r£C- 
I— <D 
£ cd 

^ 2 o 

cdon 


o 

co o 
co o 

in ^r 
~— 
CO 

o. i-' 
2 « 
- 0. 


& E 

c * 

cd .2 , 


I m 

- S - 3 - 5 

CD 


O C 
H p\i O 
CO 
CO 


5 2 


CM .CJ 
CM -ti 

■a 


o & 
co 2 


Q) LLI ^ i; CO 
2 ^ C 


O CO v 

m rc -A 


co 


£ 2 -o z ■o c 


03 

a) 


^ C\J 

T- O '- 

c co a> 

®| 2 £ 
3 . 8 ^ 


jo o 


3 

O 


CD 

E 

o in 
■o >,« 

co > O) 

8.J- ® 

o ? 

*£k 

0 ) O)^ 

£ co 

CD o TO 
C ^ CD 
O O 
© P 


- 0 . 
P *> 
CD ^ 
CD - 


O 

00 o 

. oo 
m - 
cm C. 


. m 
" o. 


-iH CD 
O 2 
® O J? 
C- CD © 

00 9 - 2 


o 

© ° 


co ? -A 


CD 


c 

O - 
CO 2 




co 


m 


CM 

OL r- 

2 iri 

- 

© % 
© ^ 

o co¬ 
in a) 

CM CD 


o to 

* J 

■IE 

CD O 
II 5 

z i 

op t: 

CD CD 
CD CO 
— CD 
O TO 

O (jj 

in lr 
o 

« W 

S 2 

cl 2 

5 § 

c s: 


o - 

© CD TP 

^ C m 
JO 

2 -o 


O 

CO CD 

go 

— CD 
® £ 
£ r 

o 

O M “ 

.2 

.2 2 

« T- 


E ro 


o 

CO o 0 

9 - © y- 

“ » o 

CD O 


CO CD r 
S: a) t 

° C TO 
oo c 
“ 3 co 
o CD 

5 ? 


© 


i>9 © 

•c > C 

3 Q. © 

^ ZT « 

O O O n 
© £ CL 2 
S W CD TO 

E o 2 “ 
2 c c 


© 




O 


w 
© 
co 

§-• 2 . 
o © 

Q . 03 

•“ C 
O o 


o 
© 
Q. 

© 2 . 2 © 
.2 g 5 .-^ © 

3 J= 

2 © 

.2 "2 

.2 > 

03 


<d 

> 

co 

■ 4 —' 

© 

O) 

© 

> 

TO . 
© O 


© 

c 

© 

■g 

'co 

© 

c 

o 

« 

© 

© 


© 


tr 


sf- oa 

© S 
© o 


^ © O 
8 C C 

•y o © 

© •.= JO 

co © ;= 
c ^ 
© 2,00 
a p = 

p © T3 

8 -d © 

© § -E- 

2 -a © 
> o © 
2 o Ej 
Q. 5 © 


© 

c 
o 

'os JO 


© 


8 > « 2 
c s - 
© © 

Q. © 

E S 
o £ 
o o 


v: t: co 

f~ © CD 

2 gS 

£ o E 


o 
© 
CL 

© 
JI 

> 

CD 
O 

c 
03 
c 
0 ) 
c 

CD 3 

a) E 
> c 
0 •= 


03 


■O c 
0 .E 

2 

So 

is 

W 2 
2 C 

2 8 

©^ 
© C 

II 

'© « 

2 ® 
ry\ 

2 ® 
> _ 
© CD 


O 

2 2 

2 E 

W © 
CD c 

£ o 
© 8 


2 

© 

© 

k. 

© 

2 

> 

CM 


I— TO CD T3 


w .2 
to £ 

O 1 

s 8 

2 3 
2 CD 
C © 
2 CL 
CD O 

2 Q. 


co 

© 

®'E 

o >> 

E ■§ 
CD 2. 

^ E 

o © 

© TO 
« 3 
2 O 

8-5 

S.-I 
^ © 
O CD 
C 


CD 

C 

5 

CD O 

■81 

TO g 5 

© 2 - 

2 8 
~ W 
CD TO 

c c 

■J= © 
W — 
X 2 

2 o 
o © 
2 2 
2 TO 
0-3 

2 I 


2 2 
c CD 

2 r- 


© t; 
© o 
° z 

TO ^ 

. 2 . w 
co © 
CD '■£ 

^ 2 
c o. 

O o 

Z Q. 


H C 


o 

© p 

2 ° 
0.0 
2 E 
2 TS 
~ c 
w o 
© o 


>- « 

° 2 
© c 
2 > 

2 O 
TO 
2 C 

8 « 

© c 

E -2 

— "o 

H 

f § 

Q. o 

.2 CD 

Tr C 

o c 

2 3 
Q-T 3 

'f 5 TO 
2 © 

CO o 

E 
© 
tr l- 

© © 
a. n 

$2 o 

co —* 
C TO 

o 2 
~ 2 
O C 

8 E 
o .c 
o © 


O 2 
•j= c 
© g 

© o 

CD TO 

© £ 
> JO 

2 © 
JO .c 
© 

© TO 
O C 
JO © 

Q- © 
2 -rr 
C. © 
.i= CD 

O f 

8 ® 

o z 

2 2 
2 2 
n g 
2 2 

TO n 
© CO 


°S 2 S 
© © 
5 E 


© o 

£ c 
£ © 
3 CL 

§ « 
5 © 


W 
2 
t_ 

3 

W 

© 

© © 
o E 
E c 
2 -2 
a. o5 
o 05 

8 E 
E S 
a: o 
g 2 . 
o W 

C/) CO 
.tr 03 
0 
c ^ 

0 03 

E 

ii 

fisi 

2 TO CL 

O o“ 

5 c 1 

© .2 -2 

© ro 2 

co c5 2 

j: 0)2 
8^2 
Z £ © 


C 

o 

0 '^= 
CO o 03 

1 5 §> 

f | i 

ill 

!c o — 
g © c 
. 0-0 
C 2 w 

2 © o 

CL > © 

tr © Q- 

3c © E 

OO 0 — 

^ Q- S 
</) — 


c E 


© "c 


c C 

© o 

£ w 
© 2 
Q. © 

E o 


© 

© 


r= © 


Jr © 


^ C 
3 O 
O O 

5 o 


© © 
CO 2 


o 

2 . 

o 

h_ 

CL 

© 


© 

; -»—> 

E ° 
o .5 
c c 
© © 
?o 
o a. 


© 

o 

"© 

co- 

8.2 

i §> 


c • 

g> 

W 


< 

a 

LU 

o 

c 

© —. 
o — 
itr w 
c © 
g> jo 

CD O 


< 

a 

LU 

o 

c 

© ^ 
g = 
it w 
c w 
g) jo 

d o 


< 

o 

LU 

o 


c 

© •—. 
g = 
it w 
c © 
O) JO 

d O 


< 

a 

LU 

o 

c 

© 

g = 

Tr w 

c 2 

g> jo 

d o 


< 

o 

LU 

O 

c 

0 ^ 
O = 
5 ti 0 

c 52 

0)0 

OD O 


> 


0 tr 
o co 


0 : 


0 

> SZ 
0 
0 


O 

0 

Q. 

E 


£ TO g 


3 £ 


O 


© c 
© 

ra © 
“ © 


£ 

3 

-c 8 

CD___ 

O ^ 


cdD. 
.£ 2 
JC ^ 
o c 
C « 


c ° 
.2 £ 
© c 

© © 
> JO 


.2 £ TO CO 

i: © > 2 
© ~ O TO 

8 1 E ~ 


© 


© 


O g 


© 


~ O 

3 J 5 

V © 

C C 

© c 
Q. © 
O DC 


© c 

Q. © 

E 


c . 

CD -2 

E 5 
g -a 
o © 


© 

8 = 
□ 8 
CD 5 1 

2^0 

£ p: 

Tr CD 

O c 
c O 
.2 2 
o > 
2 ■§ 
c E 

3 s 


© 

© 

o 

-= GC 
© » 2 
Em 2 
0.-0 | 


0 


2 2 3 T 
2 2 © 
^ DC £ 

9 C 3 
= 30 

2 I ^ 
£ CD TO 
"O E 2 

C o O 
© © CC 


TO 

2 

© 

o 

o 

« 

W 

© 

CD . 
c ^ 

s? 

IS 

c © 
© © 


o 
in 
t: o 
2 —' 

g 10 

TO E 

o s 

£ © 

2 

OS 2 

"© "O 
CD 3 
© 

> 

© 


O 

CO 

« co 

2 Jr 

il © 

© >. 


© 

> 

O 

E 

o 2 

S-S 

E i= 

2 if 
d tr 
o 0 
o 0 

© TO 

2 i 

CL © 
© ? 

f ™ 


O 
© 
3 = 
© 
TO 
C 3 

2 g 

2 8 

S> © 
© © 
> o 
tc c 
© « 
© -9 

? CO 


— © 

2 = 
© TO 

2 § 

O TO 
© C 

O 2 

£ O 


© 


© 


O TO ±= 


t 2 co 

° g* £ 

^>’1 

r r 3 

^ 8 .| 

2 t! 

w o 


C o 
O I- 
•J= 2 
© JO 

.2 s E 

•t 3 


CO 

CO 

CL 

CD 


CO 

CL 

CD 


m 

co 

CL 

CD 


co 

CO 

CL 

CO 

z 


t". 

co 

CL 

CD 


5-29 














c 

o 

o 


in 

LLI 

CD 

< 


c 

o 

’55 

c 

(0 

Q. 

X 

111 

a> 

c 

© 

a 

CL 

•2. 

’nT 

CD 


a) 

si 


E 

ra 

k_ 

O) 

o 


O) 

c 


c 

o 

<0 

a> 


©> = 

c -O 

I’c 

O 

.2 M 

2 CD 

cc 


© 

4^ o 

<ii 

© c 
o o 
c u= 
© © 
O O) 

M 

cd 


ro 

cd 


© 

— 

o 
© 
CD J 


8 .2 

I « 

8 °> 


c - 

03 


0) 


o 

03 

Q_ 

E 


C «j 

•2 53 

© J 3 

. 2 > E 

~ =3 


XJ 

C 

© 

d 

_i 

CD 

O 

d 

tr 2 

LU -I 
LL CD 


< 

O 

hi 

o 


JSs? 

£ o — 

8 §>-2 

_J w O 


w 

© 

<3 

© 

o. 

« 

jr 

a 

ii 

5 

c 

© 

0. 

o 

O 

CL 

CD 

in 


-o 
c 
© 

= ©‘ 


2 i 
0-2 
_ n 
© © 

§ » 

O 8 


© -± 
N ® 

Ii 

c o 

E =2 


£ o 


£ Q- 


Q. 

— w 

© E 

3 2 
■© ■*- 
© c 

8-2 
' © 
CL-I £ 

© c c 
c © © 
5 c o 
O o o 
o o o 


< 

a 

111 

o 

c 

03 ^ 
o = 
it= 0 

C 0 ) 

O) as 
a) O 


H s >* 


3 

0 

0 

i— 

p 

3 

o 

o 

c 

o 

o 

3 


0 
•*—> 
c 
03 
c 

E 

0 

c 

o 

o 


CD 

CO 

0 

> 

T 3 


O 
3 

0 "2 
§2 

O .E 


© 5 

© ,® 

© £ 
o o c 
0.0.0 

E ® 5 

S> 

^ © ® 
8^ £ 


co 

co 

CL 

CD 


O) 

c 

‘t _ 

o 

c ■O 
o 2 
2 '© 
o cr 
£ © 


O 

lu 

o 

p © = 

$ ^ © 
8 §>« 
_J w O 


© 

c £ 

© © 

i» 


© © 
> c 


© © 
C 


© 

o 


© 

CL 

>. 


X 3 
© 

© 

o „ 
Q- © 
O ~ 
1— . _ 

CL C 

•2 i 

ii 

© o 

CD 70 

5 © 
E o 


C C 
© O 

W 7 = 
£ £ 
CL © 
© CD 
*- © 
T 3 > 
© © 
o > 

^ o 
w © 


Q. 

cn 

£ 

o 

o 

© 

© 


© 

O) 

c 


© © 
4= .c 
© o 


< 

a 

LU 

o 


w © _ 

£ .2 Z 


co — 
© o 


8 o>« 
J i O 


> © 

c o 

8 O 

© o 

E o 

© ® 
CL £ 


© 


o 

© 

L— 

o 

03 


03 ^ .q 
2 

F F O 


£ c c 


1 ° 
o w 

a § 

o © 
■® CO 
2 £ 

^ o 
© © 
£ 4 = 
I— © 


© O 


w 


151 

o CD E 

° © £ 

| 8 

S o 

© £ 
^ sz o 
» %ffl 

E m £ 


© 
1— 
o 
« 


o © 
© > 

z © 

c o 
© ® 

o XJ 
^ C 
o © 

© W 

sz © 

if 


c © 
.2 © 

© ■§ 
CD -E 
c 

© © 
© -0 
■5 © 


c o 

S? 

03 
CO 


UJ 

0 


o 

Q) 

O 

03 

00 

o 

*D 

C 

03 


CO 

d 

CO 

o 

> 

03 

> 


-Q g- 

3 03 


>s 0 0 


C 


8t 


sz 

© 

w 

o 

w 


© 


>3 . 
XS © >. 

c — 

© cn 
E a. 

E x) 
o c 
o © 


© 


»♦— 

" o ° 
^ © 

® o 
£ © 


c 
o 

.^■© 
© CD 

p 

ii 


© co 

©E 
2 S 


0 _ 

3 C _ 
DCs- 

© ® ° 

£ 

© © o 

O £ © 

£ r cm 

a ©o 
0 ^ 

zl O 

° E © 

© I- £ E X3 

io O O O c 

o o © o ra 


^ X> £ 

is? 

8.11 

^o —I © 

i“ o 
©28 
© 


T 3 

© 

© 

n 

§ 

o 

i— 

v_ 

< 

© 


© 


© 


■° © 
£ 2 c © 

§ ofg 


c 
o 

Q. 
O 
TO 

_ < 
O © 

c 

.2 © 

o. E 
o © 

X 3 XS 

< < 


w 

© 

l— 

o 

0 

LO 


C 

o x: 

o § 
0 10 

p" 0 

•2 o 
© © 
© 8 

! © 
0 £ 


c 
0 
c 
0 
E 

L— 

© 

CL O 
XJ © 


© .t; 
JC c 
© 
E 
E 

g 


© 

^ CO © 

c d © 
© — n 
o © 
© o 

CL'© 

E 05 


E 
E 

o _ 

O .2 © 


CD 

CO 

CL 

CD 


5-30 











c 

o 

o 


in 

LU 

_i 

CD 

< 


o 

© 

O 

i- 

0. 

c 

o 

’« 

c 

(0 

Cl 

X 

UJ 

<D 

c 

© 

Q. 

a. 

to 

'© 

CQ 


© 

SI 


E 

CO 

w 

CT) 

O 


O) 

c 


c 

o 

♦3 

CO 

CT) 


& 
CT>--= 
C jQ 

o '« 

L_ 

c ° 
o o- 
£ w 
S cp 
CC 


CD 

CT o 
<* 

CD C 
O O 
C = 
CO CO 
O CT) 

C ’ 

CT)' 

co 


co 

CT) 


CD 

i_ 

o 

© 

CO- 


CD o 
o ~ 
g 03 

S : a 

'5 ' 

CT) 

CO 


C « 

o >- 

•^= CD 
CO -Q 

.2> E 

■CT CT 


"CT 

C 

CO 

d 

_i 

CO 

o 

o' 

CC 2 
OJ _l 
LL CD 


< 

o 

LU 

O 

g C _ 

5 s = 

3 §>« 

• w O 


c/> 

■CT 

CD - 
© « O 

w .E o 

1*1 
§■§ = 
= € g 

D C 
CO — CD 
0 0 
0 


O 

if) 

o| 
CT) CO 
£ CT 
CT) Q_ 
CT) O 
CO Q. 


Q. 

w 

o 


co 


CT CT 
</> X) 
__ CO 
— CD CD 
CO C -O 
ct 

c O o 
£ £ c 

Q. O) (/) 
C (1) 
CD i= ic 
C CT 
CD CO 

c co 

C m 
CT £ C 
CT CL C 

- E 


ct c 
o-2 
£ co 

CT O 
03 CT 
CT C 
0) CD 
CD CT 
$ 


CD 

o 


CD 


£ w £ 


cd a 


£ >■ c 

CT -O jE 
9 « 

5 w E 
o ® a 
a a o_ 

“Ice 

# 

o g 2 

Z (5 O 


© 2 
CT O 

O’ © 

CO CT 

>>CT 

O E 

^ CO 
CT © 
W 4= 


c o 
03 CO m 

E .9 ■= 
o E 
CD m CT 
> 0.0 
© CO © 
CO c 
> CT CT 
C © -~ 
— CD C 
© > £ 
'E > o. 

k_ 0 _ 

° > c 

1'3 « 

O > o 

CD — W 

£ 'o O 
.o' w "co 
8 _ o 

CT CO O. 
O ct .© 
X O CT 

©lo 

© 2 c 

§5*1 

sis 

CT CT O 
CD C CT 

W O j_- 


TO CO 

© 
> 
4—• 

co 

CT 


© 

r~ 

0)~ o 

E -* © 

c o -o 

© g .* 

o II © 

r) O) i_ 

. . .CT CO 
o c E 
© .CT CO 

o®: 
£ -q 2 

© © O 

£ o o 

c © £ 

o * 

.x © w 

1 § 3 
> N 

0)£ 

C < 

C c 

§ © 

0 _V* 

JD "C 
O 

_ £ 

O — 

0 


= ° 

0 4_r -3 
O) 

c 

XI 
if) 

0 

£ 

if) 

0 
0 


C _ 

2 3 

Is 

CT CT 

C/) C 
CT © 
O _ 
O © 


c/> 

© 

© 

h— 

ro 

© 


CD 


> X 


c s 
'■5 ® 

o o 

7D © 
CD © 
O 


© § 
2'^ 
Q- o 
© ~ 
£ CT 
^ O 


CT O 
© CT 
© © 
5 c 
>, © 
© E 
> © 

I g- 

© .CT 
if) 


© P g © w 

© 

> 


O © 


■CT -CT « 

© 5 © 
o £ g 


Q.O O 4r 


- 0 
0 0 

II 

_ if) ^ 

o s ® i 

E E E g 5 c 

CL CL o CT o 
33 = «» 
CT CT © 

© © o 


. . CT ,© _ffl 

w © 

CD CT 

2 >- 
CT © 
O -CT 
OT CD 
© © 
© 4= 

L_ I 

•v "CT 
X) © 
© © 
© § 

> -CT 

EiS 
2-e 
© 
© o 


© "? 


w v> 
© © 
2 -CT 
;- © © 
f §3 

0 ci 
0 "S c 

1 c 2 

© c © 

> - _Q 

CO g' "O 

111 
~ o 3 
OCT© 
— CT © 
C CT) © 
© C i; 

E © j>c 

© £ ® 

2 E « 

r; o e 

c £ 
© w 
_ © W 
CT) q) co 
C i- © 

OCT© 


© CT 


C CT 

go 

o 
o 


•e h- c c 


© 


OCT o 1 


O CD 
5 CL 


55 s 


0 
> 
o 
E-£ 


0 


0 


CD 

C 

3 

0 


o 

O) 

c 

c 

k_ 

3 

JD 

■Q 

c 

0 

CO 

c 

o 

© 

1 _ 

© 

CL 

o 

CT) 

C 

"1 _ 

© c/) 

o n 
© 
O CT 

tr ct 
© « 
o. ^ 

© g 

© 0 
© © 
© CT 
O © 
© CT 
c o 


o 

CT 

CT 

C 

8 © 

Is 

o © 

•£. 2 
© © 

m © 
CT —I 

o 9 

z . © 
C CT 
© ~ 

cc £ 

oCj © 

■> w 
f) -o 

cj CD 
© © 
CT $ 


5 - 

•> NX 


0 

o 

c 

0 

■D 

L_ 

o 

o 

o 

0 


iJ) 

3 

O 

X 

o 

c c 

0.2 

>> 5 

ii 

CT O 
« O 


< 

O 

LU 

o 

C 

0 ^ 
O = 
it: if) 
c 0 

O) 0 

CO O 


c 

■2 © 
i 5 o 

0 <f) 


■Q 

c 

0 


_Q 

CD 

0 

> 

0 

3 

O 

O 

if) 

0 

> 

1 

0 

0 



CD 

Q) 


c 

X 


O 

0 

C 

’4^ 

O 

C 

O 

0 

0 

0 

Q. 

0 

0 

O 

£ 

0 

0 

E 

X 

0 

-Q 

1 — 

3 

3 

0 

u> 

0 

c 

0 

0 

0 

CL 


O 

0 

C 

if) 

E 

0 



"O 

O 

c 

_c 

0 


0 

> 

O 

E 

0 

■O 

O 

O) 

c 

’k_ 

0 

'■5 

c 

0 

3 

0 

O 

C 

0 

0 


0 

C 

3 

0 

u) 

3 


cn 

0 

*o 

0 

0 

C 


o 

Q. 

CD 


if) 

k_ 

£ © 

I? 

o 

O •*- 
© m 

O © 


c 

© 

© 

CT 

| s 

n 

if) o 

c 


CL 

0 


>) 

0 

*» S 

O g 

© © 
CT © 

£ CT 
CT W 
CT © 
CT © 

© O 
c CT 
o c 
CT O 

© O 
© CT 
£ © 
£ E 

"CT £ 
© CL 

i-i 

oi 

o 

S 5 

“•S' 
£ CD 


-2g 

ii 

© 


O « 

£ CT 
£ CT 

E i 
8-2. 
£ CD 

§# 


W -C) 

§g 

o o 
L. CT 
£ c 
© 8 


c 

© 

E 
£ 

Q. 

.§ 8 

8 


CT 

C 

© 

c 

o 

0 

L. 

0 

Q. 

O 


3 

O 

1 — 

O © 

CT c 

Q. © 

w -2- 
ro o. 
>, © 
© ~ 
c o 

c © 

© o 

8 § 

3 0 
CO ~ 

0 .2 
0 0 
E E 


5-31 










c 

o 

o 


m 

UJ 

CD 

< 


CL 

C 

o 

'« 

c 

CO 

Q. 

X 

UJ 

0 

.c 

« 

Q. 

CL 

.52. 

co 

CD 

.c 


0 

■E 


E 

CO 

k_ 

O) 

o 


05 

c 


c 

o 

’•3 

<D 

O) 


05 = 

£ .o 

1 C 

o §- 
£ 0 
S CD 

cc 


0 

o 

C.O- 

0 c 
o o 

C -4= 
CO 0 
O 05 

H 

<z> 


05 

O) 


CD 

l— 

o 

0 

CD- 


8 .2 

s « 
8 f 

I i 

05 

CO 


o 

0 

Q. 

E 


C <0 

o *- 

■J= 0 
0 X5 

2>E 

•— 3 


TD 

c 

0 

d 

_l 

co 

o 

d 

CC S 
LU -I 
U_ CD 


< 

o 

tu 

o 


E c ^ 

E 8 = 

Jjl M 
8 & « 
-J 55 O 


c‘° 

o cc 

•4= LU 

II 

§£ 
O g 

0 5 

o J 

0 Z: 

■° c 
0 0 

0) ^ 
0 -J 
5 CQ 

0 
0 
o 

X 

o 
c 


0 

e 

"O CD o 

0 — = 


s? -E 


CD 2 0 
£ 0- 5 
w cc 2 

0 ofi 0 
0 2 05 
oo 2 

fls 

S 

~ 2 .2 

® © 0 

C I— _ 
2 . 0 
CL 0 0 

n- c S 
LI- 0) ^ 
°3 p 3 R 

^ Cl CD 
CD CD 
* 


0 z, 2 

^ o 0 

C ® ” 

*“ 0 XI 
> 0 
5 0 
5 


0 

E . 

Q. C 


— 0 
0 05 0 

!■§ § 
X 0 © 
§H£ 

CD 0 —- 

o 2 « 
2 jr c 
>,.2 o 

k— ^ 

2 CL 0 


2 „ 


£ C 

— o 

0 o 
cl E 
2 0 

© 5 

xi O 
o 


- o> © 


0 


. 0 


0 0 
0 O 
0 ^ 


0 


O 


£ ” o 


o 

T5 “ 

s 8 

8-1 
0 o 

£ I 

c 2, 
0 0 
> co 
© 

b XI 
CL-C 

£1 


■O o- 

8 

•5 _ c 

0 2 £ 

*- -s CL 

® O (5 
O o © 
—I -O "O 

co 0 3 

o 0 o 

CD ^ £ 

£.C/5 -o 


0 CD 


0 2 

_ 2 O 

x: 0 3= 
.2>-o 2 

£ 2 8. 

E 0 c /5 

•2 2© 

0 £ £ 
3 • H 
j= -O 
0 0 
§ S 0 
8 5 2 
05 £ ® 
£ 05X3 
— C 0 
®3 0 
o 0 £ 
0 5 £ 


oi 2 
£ ~ 
0 0 

£ 0 
O E 

£ E 
5 2 
2 

2 0 
"5 

CD 

—: cd 
W O) 

e s 

!.£ 
-Q co 

T3 ^ 

0 2 
£ 0 

E T3 
0 0 

2 0 
0 £ 
El £ 

2 -D 

3 0 
O 0 

S § 


8.5 

82 

el 


c 


E 0 
0 > 

0 > 

2 E 

S-8 

€ 5 ^ 

^ C 

r ^ co 

^2S 


o C 
E _C0 

2 E- 
2 ® 
if 

05 . 
E X5 
XZ 2 
0 O 
0 3 

£ 1 

c o 

CD O 

E « 


&-S 
0 0 


■C 0 

C 0 

3 


“■ 0 
_ 05 o 

0 £ 0 0 


c 

0 c 
E -o 
g. c 

*3 

cr 
0 


co 
0 0 
i= 0 

3 M— 
0 C 
0 *T 
0 TD 


0 

0 


0 C 


_ CD 
O p C 

O 
0 

0 

EE 


„ 0 
TD 0 
0 0 
0 0 
O ^ 
Q_ 

O 


0 " 8 

0 CL 

0 2 


.0 _ 

o _ -O o -O 
— — o 0 

05 © 


O 


0 0 


■o O 


5 5 


< 

O 

LU 

o 

+—• 

C 

0 ^ 
o = 
it= 0 
c 0 
0)0 

(*) O 


0 

0 

3 


o 
0 
O 

k_ 

CL 

0 

^ . 

O 

c 

£ 0 

O 
3 


O 

E 2 

c .S2 

S | 

[i- b 
0 


0 


0 

0 

o 

0 

CL 

0 


0 


0 


0 w 

8 ® 
O o 


"O .co 


0 0 
•5 

0 x: 
£ ~ 
0 o 

0 m 
0 0 
0 »♦— 
•h- > 

0 ® 

O -X 

.2, 0 

© 2 


O Zrt w 

is 0 0) 

>* 3 !tr 

xi: 3 o 2 

= o c ® 

*- E E CD 
O 05 E £ 
E 0 O 5 
2 0 ® 2 
0 £ 2 < 

C 0 

ll 

0 5 

c 0 

Q -G 

3 


.b 0 


0 

TD 

0 

0 

£ 

0 

3 

O 

X 

o 


0 

o 

c 

0 

m- C 

O 0 

0 c 

3 5 
0 "~ 


"O 

0 

o 

3 

TD 

C 

O 

o 


"o 2 
0 c 

II 

p © 


-- 02828 ! 


-^.2 < 2 


o 

P -O 
0 c 

J3 0 


_ 0 ^ 

r.-° « 

c 

■o ^ .2 
0 P 0 
o b > 
00 ^ 

^ ^ 3 
0 < o 


5-F 

>, c 
" E 


= 0 


o 
o 

0 

- w 
0 0 


0 2 

XI P 0 

2 5 o 

O 0 0 

E ~ E 

g 0 £ 

Q. E ® 

f|| 

0 < £ 


in 

cc 

< 


-o 

E 

0 

d 

_i 

CO 

o 

d 

cc ^ 

LU -I 
LL CO 


< 

O 

LU 

o 

E C _ 
1 8 = 
8 E 0 

8 05® 

_J w O 


0 

‘o 

0 

Q. 1 - 
0 O 

v_ » 
0 
N 


0 

0 

S 2 
0 
_c 


c 
0 
o 
0 
■O 

■o 0 


I o 

E -E 


E £ 
c o 
c > 

O « -o 


E 

0 

0 


0 


O = 


£©! 


_ 0 
0 > 

8 ® 

o 0 

O o 
m 

0 « 
E 2 
0 3 

I* 

2 ™ 
3 

O CO 

0* 

W 0 

*0 Q. 

CD 0 

xi 0 

c 2 

o 0 

Z to 


3 

o 
5 

0 ^ 

i| 

05 «L 

Stir 


2 0 

E ° 
Z E 

o ® 

2 g 

0 0 

0 <=^ 

0 05 
82 

£ => 

E o 

0 5 

o < 


XI c 

•C O 

O E 
Z „ 0 
. CC 0 
>>03 = 
0^0 
E o 5 
•2 0 0 
.1^ CO 

?E® 

<ofl 

. 0 X 2 

2 E 0 
o c ^ 
2 0 ® 
t 2 = 

80 ? 

c | ^ 

£80 
E s 

v/y C Q- 

s ® E 

2 8 
Q. •— 


V) 


O LL F 

>> e .i 

•£ •— e 
_ E 

05 O 

c $ 


— c 

= z! 

o 

£ -o 

0 •£. 5 


'Sfi g £ 


< 

O 

UJ 

o 

c 

0 

g = 
i*= w 

c 2 
05 0 

co o 


c 

2 >, 

IS 5= 

0 o 

® Si) 
o 

Ell 

® g £ 

•2 8 £ 

J= .2 o 

0 CL 0 

° ® r 

O £ £ 


E ° 

0 CO 

§1 

2 « 

0 k- 

0.2 0 
0 0 2 
-O SD 
~ C 


0 


0 


0 
O 
E 

0 E' 

"9 "0 0 
3 tc 

to o 

"o E 


0 

~ X3 


0 


0 


CL 

CD 

z 


o 

_l 

CO 

o 

•o 

E 

0 

o 

cc 

LU 

LL 


O 

LU 

o 

S 0 = 

XI o — 

co E 0 

0 05® 

_J -55 O 


c O 
O Q £ 
0 Q o 

£ x o 

« 0 o 

O 05 ® 
XI E -o 
§00 
. O 0 
k-T « 3 
CD CO q) 

cc § o 

o o — 
2 0 « 
2 ® -o 

1 ^8 
O ® 5 
00-0 
xi ^ o 
2 0 £ 


2 0 
0 £ 

c £ 
0 0 
cc ±s 


0 0^. 

OO^ 
0 — 

Q. 3 

E .2 


ai 2 

0 c 

JO 0 


■° CC 
>-oa 
0 2 

2 o 

£ 0 


Q. 

Id 


5 £ 

0 >. 1 — 
0 2 • 

CD o -o 
XI £ 2 

^ C)£ 

O (5 J 

Z ^ E 


CO CO 
C .tr 
CD »-T 

£ 8 

2 0 
o 5 
> o 

0 XX 
0 • - 

3 -O 
XI 0 
— XU 

0 ’ 3 

EE 

to •o 
0 0 
o X3 

o -o 

>- 3 

E | 

X5 5 
0 £ 
0 2 
5 Q 


0 

> 


® £ 

°- 0 co 
c 0 2 

•2^2 

<5 «b 

CD 03 
0 CD jz 
CD c 
b a) 
CO 

o S E 

ES2 

e= CL 0 

® E 0 

^5 .5 c 

o 2 0 

© 0 •£ 
jx o 3 

O 5 0 

— 0.T3 

t) 0 0 

0 CD N 

f#| 

0 o £ 

.0 Z E 


< 

O 

LU 

o 


c 

0 — 
o = 
£ 0 
c 0 
05 0 

W O 


0 ^ 
•o o 
c © 
0 3= 
•^- 0 

*1 


0 -O 

XJ c 


0 

0 

0 

o 

0 

CL 

0 


h 0 

0-2-2 
w “O ^ 

S 0 
.2 
♦ * 

o 0 
2 0 
to 5 

o E 

O 0 


3 

O 


£ £ 0 
0=0 
— -O o 
XD = 1 
0 $ 

f c 0 

E 0 2? 

o a, 0 

Q. l. x: 
e 0 
£ o y= 


Cel 

■st 

CL 

CD 


5-32 



















Mitigation Monitoring Program for the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 


05 = 

E .g 

1 c 

o ©- 

2 c/5 
2 CD 

cc 


CD 

u 

<^- 

CD C 
O O 
C = 
CO CO 
O 05 

li 

CO 


CO 

05 


CD 

t_ 

o 

'© “- 

m c 

o - 

s (0 

S .2> 

05 

CO 


■O 

c 

co 

O 

_j 

CO 

o 

d 

CC 2 
111 -I 
U_ CD 


< 

o 

UJ 

o 

c c _ 

2 S = 

tt *= c/) 


(/) 

& 05 2 
_J w O 


CD 

E 

O CD 

co £ 


_ — "O 

co co 2 

£ 05 m .2 


CO 

p 


C/> 


O) 


2 ;E 
cB o 
*‘§ £ 
.2 o © 

c r ■§ 

§•5-5 

© c .E 
CL S C 

1 Q. 


i o 


P 3 c/5 

P O" P 
E £ © 
o W ■£ 

p CO 


o 


€0 

1« 
© 2 


—3 Q_ 
Q. 05 » 
Q. C C 
0=0 
C/5 X = 
CD O 


ir P 


P 


C/5 £ £ 
- P _ 

•£ N .E 
© E -o 
Ec? 

a E S 

ES§ 

go: £ 

g r- O 
^ § C/5 

P .2 CO 

zr" C/5 CD 
,2 C/3 c 
CD 0 c 

.C Q. © 

tr oI£ 
00 “ 
Z CO o 


c p _ 
® P w 

CD "O P 

Q. £ 2 

£ 8 '5 

= 0-0 

§2 8 . 

1 

| 2 cr 

£ I® 

S.? o 

•= P C/5 
P 05 P 

C C C 


P 

c 

'p *- 


c- p c _ = 

E *- P c 

^ = c/5 2 _ •— 


2 £ 

CD ~ 

■o ^ 

£ ® c 

— c 

CO O 03 

g © .E 

2 o -5 

S'jo 

'* g 8 


© 


r- ^ 
p p 0 
2 « o 
o P P 

~ > p 

c £ o 

© W ~ 

E . "o 
5 • p 
.9- 05 c 
o CD .05 

® ^ w 

© 

c p 

Q.^ 3 


p -5S 
- 8 
2 | 


05 

c 

CD 

C 


o O' O 


= P 


O 

“ .2 c/5 


o = 


p O ^ C £ 


o-3 

8 i 

io o 


O' J £ 

C/5 LL 


P 


P o l_ 
c c p 
0 p =? 
o p 5 
05 ^ -o 
C T> w 
C 3 £ 

c 5 -O 

I 

cr P ■ s ~ 

0 

Of P 

P o § 

_Q Z = 

‘p . 5 

CPC 
O P O 
Q- o 0 

8 O 05 

£ p c 

p p 5 o ^ 

P2«5^ 

O § C P 

g 8 2 2 


o 

p 

a. 

E 


c « 

o >- 

= CD 
P 13 

.2>E 

•- o 


< 

o 

111 

O 

c 

p .—. 

.2 = 

2 p 

c P 
05 P 

CO O 


>> 

£k r 
-O 05 
■8 p w 


p p 


2 £ 
S ? 
i -§ 

p 


. o 


>>— p 
c ••= E 

cd 2 2- 
■c P 3 
p c O' 

P O gr; 
C O 05 

p p "5 

P c — 
— o £ 
U. O g 


p 0 
p m 
|o c5 

O 05 

O p . 
o > >> 

If? 
gf9 

P .05 £ 

0 >05 
0.13 C 


CO 

Q. 

CD 


05 

C 

o 

C "O 

o £ 
E-5 

O O- 

-5 P 


< 

O 

111 

o 

C c _ 

5gE 

p o p 

S 05 P 
-J P CJ 


© 
05 
P C 

2 p 


c c 

O P 

p £ . 
p 2 p 
> o- © 

(J cu 

Z. r- O 

c 0.0 
C 2 2 
P p Q- 
E p © 
© — s= 
"c c 
p p ~ 
<- p p 
- Q. 


© 


P 


-6 p 
© — 
p 2 o 

2 o p 

o 

> a) 
°-p > 

.52(5 0 

C •= © 

O -2 o- 

~ p p 

p -c £ 

05-0 _ 

S p 2 

E o p 

o 2 ® 

Z p 2 


O 

HI 

o 

m E — 

5 g = 

P ^ P 

© 05® 
_J p o 


2 05 
© 

5§S 

CQ = © 

n , O > 

® P P 

i= 0 

^4- C © 

O O u. 
O - P 

l C £ 

p .2 o 

c -rr C 

° 2 o 

O CO P 


< t ) 

D 

O 

'k_ 

03 

> 

C 

o 

■ 4 —' 

CO 

CO 


a> c 

>5 O) 

-O CD 

— > 


c n 

2 ^p 

2 © 13 
O C P 
2 p sz 

p E 


© 

^ 53 = 

P3 Q -.— 

o o g 

g § 05 

f !i 

! p p 

©Op 

2 o 
2 © p 

= O- £ o. 
5 Ei ® 


p 


-0 © 

© 1 

g E 

§1 

< 33 

© o 

1 : O 

2 5 
o © 


2 o 


.y p 

o-E 
o © 
•o fr 
< < 


>% 

I’C C 

— O CD 

i_ 2 c c 
CD 2 O P 
ai r; -5 E 

^ 5co g. 

P O 1_ 

£ -o © 2 

p g 

p £ >.2 

2 o 5 13 

2 c = co 

- P g>r= 

75 S u © 
2 o © r= 
p f- — 
o. p £ 2 

.E co p g 


p 

v_ 

O 

O 

o 

u 

05 

P 

o 

p 

l— 

o 

p 

00 

o 

o P 

8.5 

E « 


p- 

a. 

m 

z 


5-33 













05 = 
.9 J3 

g g 

O °- 
2 « 
S 0 ) 
DC 


0 

- 10 
2 w 

J 2 

co £ 

f c o 

( -j O) 

— I m 
CO ™ £. 

O o S 
- £ to 
O o ® 
DC ,3 g 
UJc® 
ll. (0 c 


0 ) 


05 C 
O O 
c = 
to co 

O O) 

c 1 

05* 


CO 


< 

o 

HI 

o 

E c ^ 

5 3 = 

0^0 
3 §)« 

J wO 


c 

o 

O 


m 

UJ 

_J 

00 

< 


CL 

c 

o 

to 

c 

co 

Q. 

X 

HI 

05 

C 

05 

Q. 

a. 

<o 

’to 

CO 

JC 


05 

_c 


E 

(0 

k. 

O) 

o 


05 

c 


to 

05 


c 

o 

O 

2 S? 

1 5 


o O 


*o 
c 
to 
,- to 
2 xi 

"O c 

g £ 
m O 

?! 


.c .c 

— 05 


to 

05 


i 2 *. 

— 05 
Q.C 

5 -o 
|2 
o 3 
2 0 
o 

g 2 - 

> to 

(0 3 

co .2 
co > 

x: £ 
■C CL 
O 0 ) 

z 5 


o 


£ E 


-H CO 
O 05 i_ 

n -o 

£ CO O 
05 05 O 

•c e o 

R -i 

II 

<D 5 

5 .c cd 

o ■£* 

o M- CD 
O —I 


o 

=5 


"O CD 

•3 § 

O 

o 


CO 

0 

c 

3 

■D 

0 

1 = 


0 

£ 

C 

1 c 


<D 0 

' cd 


■=? & 


"O 
3 

o 

§ .5 


| 9 

Q. 05 
05 ■£ 

§ s 

co © -o 

05 05 "O 
0 jC 0 

L— 4^ -*—* 

"£S 


II 

—I O 
“ £ 
! 5 

05 ? 

11 


CO 05 

co — 

r- ° 

tg 00 

- Q5 
_>. 0 ) 


CO 


05 

5 -9 


co — 


CO 

0 to 


TO 
05 
£3 -O 

2 g 

£1 

? o 

4—» 

« 8 

© 3 

2 § 

c° 

8 £ 

CO 0 

2 f 

® o 

>» I 

0 

£3 
05 


■o E 

TO O 

< 2 


“5 05 h- 

£ 0 2 
— C 
> 0 


CD 

0 

o 

L_ 

3 

O 

0 

0 

L_ 

c 

o 

Td 

4-* 

05 

05 

05 

> 

O) 

_c 

0 

X 

05 

0 

.C 


c 

o 

o 

3 

To 

c 

o 

o 

0 

3 

T3 

0 

JZ 

o 

0 

o 


>, o 

0 0 
£ CL 


0 
i- tr 
o o 

<— CL 
— 0 
c: c 

I £ 


— 05 
3 CO 

co 

CO Q- 

(35 to 

co £ 
to to 
® « 
3 
"O 


Q. 

E 

05 

oo 

33 

3 

O 

g 

2 . 

‘to 

CD 

-C 

■c 

o 


c 

o 

to 

CO 

05 

to 

05 

C 

05 

05 


■o 

5 

05 

.C 

4—* 

O) 

c 

3 

■O 

0 

0 

0 

0 

CJ 

0 

C 

0 

L_ 

0 

0 

0 


.05, 

m 2 

x: 2 

E 3 

Z 3 
- to 
E 05 
2 c 
Q- = 
to 

DC 05 
*5 <= 

0 o 


U) 

0 


c 

o 


ix 05 > 


.tr -o 

§ 3 
05 O 
O ° 

c « 
CO ® 
"O £ 

L_ 

o c 

8 a 
0 0 
C 0) 
O) 


c 
o 
0 
0 0 
0 0 
0 C 

CD "O 
.E 3 

■O o 

0 O 
2 0 
XD -2 
05 |q 

|l 


0 

> 

0 

3 
0 

C 

o 

o 

3 

L— 

0 
C 

o 
o 
0 

L_ * 4 - 

Q_ 0 

4- -Q 

O 
3 
T3 

§^5 

O 05 

2 = 

3 CO 

O 05 
g C 


co 

■O 


>< to "o 


to CD 
CO - 
05 

to 


CO 


> 
o 
_ E 

05 m 
C ' 
"O TO 
05 3 
05 o 
X5 g 


|S 

§ to 
> O 
mL Cl 

? 05 

£ -c 


_ o 

to ( 3 ) 
05 O 
O c 

9 W 
■Q -Q 
TO 

(35 05 


"O a) 
■O .b: j= 
cut 
CO 

- ^ o 
2 2 co 
— 1 co •= 
m 05 | 
a E -o 
— o 

W 05 o 

^ ° 2 

11 CL 

^ 0-0 

|s g 
g o- 

C 05 

2 i « 

co to 2 

r 05 _ 

3 o 2 

co ( 3 ) .2 
c 5 c — 
O CL 
o 


32 

w 2 
c § 
O § 


05 C 

.E .2 

CO O 
05 O 


05 

;C = 

c § 
o 3 
■O P 


to 


CO 


_3 
o 
, c 


o _ 

2 cj 

O (35 ^ 
o Q- O 
» CO ° 

o) So 

2 2 05 

. U 0 
"O (D 0 

0 r g 
c Q - 

05 2 

E c 

2-05 


05 

sl 

0) 05 


CO 


0 


co % 


to £3 
"O 

■i= o 

£3 C 
05X3 


CO § 

0 g 

C ^ 
. 0 
■= 0 
^ c 


0 

o ® 
2 -o 

2 H 

0 o 
O T3 
CJ 0 
^ 0 
0 o 

X) » 
0 


> 
O 

c 

_ . <D 
y | 05 


£3 to 

O 


o O 
o H_ 
O "O 
0 


2 o 

0 C5 


> 

0 


tS ^ .= = 


.25 05= 2 

- E S E 

05 = 2 != 

0 O>= 

O 


E E ^ o os 


0=0 


0 


2 0 g 2 .o 


2 ° 

3 

O ^ 
g TO _ 

%(3% 
m t 0 

□ 0 

2 O o 

|a a 

Z 2 0 


3 ^ 
O 

g 

05 

c 


0 _ 

0 0 


2 

Q. 

E 

o 

o 

-O 

c 


0 
-O 

o 

£ 

0 

E _ 

050 3 

c 0 0 

0 .« 
0 © .-to 
c 


O ( 1 ) 

£l « 

C3. g £3 


0 


0 
> 

o 0 

E 2 

0 . 

*- >* 
c § 

O g 

= h! 

2 o 
0 H 

05 ^ 

0 05 
> 'O 

“5 c 0 
0 o 

S? 
8-2 
2 g 

- o 

3= CJ 


o 

2 0 

«;e 

0—0 
CO T3 
2 ? 
o 0 

3 . 
o 

0 H T3 
-O Q C 
£ O 2 


c 

0 


05 

0 

C 

0 

E 


0 

k_ 

0 

-o 

0 

H 


0 ^ 

0 § 

£= H 0 

05 © 2 

IS I 

2 g 0 


E 0 -o 
0 c c 

CL 05 00 


DC 

c« 

O 

0 


-o 

0 


Fr w 

oT "5 

0 © 


- 0 .CO 0 

?? 
"O o 
US (/) 

CD 


>% 

.Q 


I S 

CD l_ 
CD CD 


C 
CD 

E L 

0 o 

Q. C 

E o 

-o 2 
3 0 

0 S’ 
g § 
.0 ® 

2 0 

21 

|1 

Z CL 


05 CU 
0 0 
0 2 

Is 

o 0 

0 c 

&-a 

—• 0 
? 0 
2 05 

0 ® 

05 > 

£ 3 

05 0 
0 05 

0 c 
0 ‘ T3 
1 = 0 
2 0 

0 t 

K 0 

8 £ 


0 

1— 

o 
0 
co - 


0 O 
0 = 
E 0 
2 = 
c i 

05 

CO 


< 

o 

HI 

o 


c 

0 ^ 
0 — 
2 0 
c 0 

05 0 

CO O 


0 

0 

Cl 

E 


0 

■O 

L_ 

^3 {g 
^2 

CD .tr 

II 

§1 

§1 

Cl o 

c 0 
•- £ 
0 ^ 

o o 
co o 


o 

c 

o 


>s 

o 


0 

3 


C 

o 

CJ 


0 

_ 0 
o -o 

0 05 O 
- c 0 

'E 0 

x 22 

1°8 

2 0 c 
200 

■§ 2 -S 
o Q. 0 

0 0 05 

0 a 0 

0 2 > 


0 


& 

3 

"O 

CD 

CD 

tr 

CD 

0 

C 

E 

00 

CD 

CD 

c 0 

c 

3 

CD 

O 

*o 

c 

CD 

~o 

c 

CD 

CD 

CD 

C 

cn 


CO 

00 

0 

CD 

c 

c 


C (0 

o >- 
= 0 
0 £3 

.25 E 

• — 3 


5 <§ 

CL 2 
CO DC 

z < 


5-34 










& 
03 = 

£ -Q 
1 c 
o ®- 

^ p 

S o> 

<r 


CT 

C 

CO 

d 

w 

o 

d 

CC 2 
LLI _) 

x co 


ct 

c 

CO 

d 

_J 

CO 

o 

d 

CC 2 
LU -1 
LL CO 


ct 

c 

CO 

d 

_) 

CO 

o 

d 

CC 2 
LU -J 
LL CD 


cd 

CT o 
<i 
CD C 
O O 
C CT 
CO CO 
O D) 

C ’ 
CT) ■ 

C0 


< 

0 

LU 

O 

ii 
£2 


CO 

O 


® ^ p 
8 §3® 
■ p O 


0 

UJ 

O 

11 = 
ct o — 

W t m 


03 .?? 


CO 


p O 


0 

LU 

o 

« § 
ct ° 


CO 


« C p 

8 §3 ® 
_J w O 


c 

o 

o 


LO 

LU 

_J 

CD 

< 


CL 

c 

o 

'« 

c 

CO 

CL 

X 

UJ 

cu 

,c 

"p 

Q. 

a. 

CO 

'co 

CD 

CT 

+-* 

4— 

o 

z 

CD 

CT 


E 

CO 

l_ 

03 

O 


CT) 

C 


c 

o 

CD 

O) 


0 2 


O) 

c 

'0 

0 

a) 


P 7R 


0 
TD CD 

^ <3 

CD Q 


O 

CD 


" P 
2^ co 


CL 

P 


p ct 


co 


co 

CT) 


CO P 
£ £ 
03 c/) 

O P 

O CL 

co 

CT 


Q- CT 

c E 

® 03 

E £ 

CT)T3 

P 2 
C P 

n 


o 

c 

2 

CT 

O 

g 

o 

03 


Z 3 a3 c o 9 *= 


w +-^ 

03 CO 

tl 

13 CD 

c o 

«s. 

C/3 CO 

p ■o 

8.8 
O CD 
CLCT 

P 1 

tn - 

#| 

il 


P 
O CO 

p ^ 
03 > 
> P 
ct co 
a *r 

P_ Q_ 

ct ct 
o S 

-C CD 


O g © 
5 ^ £ 

r ®-0 

.E ct c 
« 

— O 03 
cu I s - 
“ X 
ffl CO 

•JJ 03 O 

O t -CT 
O © O 

03 


O 

CD 

: ~o 
: £ 
'■ CT 


03, 03 > 


CO w 

.2 g 
~ o 
I 


r 5 E 


o 

CO 

c 

o 


co 


03 


1 03 
CO ^ 

p > 

C -3= 

o g 
o co 


c 
o 

o 

CT 

4_ 

P = 
C "CT 

O ? 

. p 
< > 
2 55 
I c 

> 03 

> CO 


co 
c 
o 

CO 

co 

03 „ 
P CO 
CT) O 

c -O 


p 5 

CT p 

il 

o 3 

p c 
p ® 
^ ffl 
2 ct 

•CT 03 
P CT 

8 § 

X p 
p > 

co a: 

C0 p 
£ ^ 
* o 
5 o 
£ o 

.9 p 
P iE 


p 

JCT 


CT 

O 

§ 

03 
■*—» 

(/) 

> 

o 

c 

CD 

CD 

C/) <D 

§-g 

O 0 
p E 

3 
CD 


CO 

C L_ 

8 t3 -o 
CD C 
£ 0 (D 

1 CT P 

•CT -D P 

m C CT 

2 p P 

° 2 i 
S 12 


p 

> 

be 

o 

CT 

CO 

o 

o 


p 

£ 

CT 

1 

CT 


CT 

P 

P 

> 

CO 

o 

X 

03 

P 


CO 

a. 

E 

p 

L_ 

Q) 

Cl 

CD 

O 

co 

CD 

0 


_ JO 

Id 5 


<D X 

p CD 
O CT 

o 

CO 
CO 
p 


O co 


CO 


CO 

c 

CT 
CT 
O 
§ 
co 
P CT 


£ 

CD 

c 

0 

E 


CD 


0 


o ^ 

O Q 


0 

L_ 

O 

P 

CD' 


P o 

O ~ 

® P 
8 . 2 1 

I ^ 

CT) 

CO 


< 

0 

LU 

o 


c 

co 

o = 

9: CO 
C « 
CT) P 

CO O 


< 

0 

LU 

o 


c 

CO —. 
O — 
CO 
C P 
CT) P 

co o 


tf 

o w 


3 P 

CT E 


>. 

■4-^ 

!q 

L_ 

3 


a) ts 


E o 


n ® 

Sl 

p 
CT 


O 

5 

I 5 ! 

CO 2 

P Q 
"2 co 

W CD 

» c 
2 c 

o D3 

pa: 

CT CT 
CT ° 

o -9 
$ P 

i i 

O .c 5 
p 5 

£ O 
CT) P 

X O 


W CT 
— C 
CT CO 

2 c 
£ o 

CD = 

E « 
c 

CT P 

v i 

P 

O w 
p p 

|Efi 

03 

*d 0 
o £ 

£ - 
0 *D 

E l 

P> CD 

I E 

! IP 

o V) 

~ w 


o 
5 

E 
co 
p 


co 

CO 

o 

4— 

o 

p 

c 

o 


_ 1 o 

‘P i e 

•E >4 U) 

o ® o 

CT P ° 

= - 8 ^o 

" 2 . 1 ? 

■c p 8 

O P CT 
{= -2 co 
“ ° p 
^ co co 


§ P 
~ > 
a? ® 


P 


o ■“ 

C CT 


C — 
CD P 

a. p 

® CT 

E cr 


0 CT 
13 O 

_ a 

P C P 

ni 

= Q ^ 
® « P 

^ o ® 

O (— 

CT C 

° ® P 

g X - 


CT 
03 -5 

Sf^ 

O z. c 

-C m 
P O c 
P£.S 

§-CT)C0 

L_ L, # 

®- 1c P 
co O P 

p CT P 
CO i: CT 

CT p P 
CT Jr -t! 
2 ^ co 
z . O § 

® 2 o 
CT £0 2 

p 2 c 

ego 
o o — 
Z "O p 

• c 
c E P 
P 2 .i 
Q ^ ? 

P c ® 

p ® .S 
c E P 

S'gl 

X p o 


P p 
CT CD 
— P 
CT O 
CD CL 

11 
03 CT 


■° CT 
CT O 


CT) C 
CO O 

s’i 


§ p 

2 2 

^ 8 

03 _ 

E p 

oip ” 
.2 ®> CT 
CT 2 §, 
^ CT ^ 

o Q t 
0 


p 5” 

CD LL 


0 0 o 

Tl 

= 2 © 

0 p 

.E o 
c 0 

0 •« Q. 
■*—’ a y 


< 

0 

LU 

o 


c 

CT *—- 
O — 
Hz p 
c p 
CT) P 

d o 


p 

p 
■E >4 
-g C3 
o P 
CT ~ 


O 

CT 

CL 

E 


CT 


CT 
® CT 


CT CC 
CT CD ^ 

CT 9 z 

P CT c0 
CT) O -2 
CT P 2 
C P .-9 
P £ O 

P 

•^,-C 
CT) <- 
O P 
CT 


CD 


X E CT 


O O CT O CT 


2 CT 

P CT 

P 

O o 


p _ 
o 

2 CT 
g P CT 

X > p 

M 

co p p 
Q- e (d 
E ® E 

.£ p CT 


,® CO 

O 

P CT 
CL CD 


c 
0 

ffl E 
CT) CT 
P Z 


CT 


^ ~ < 


*U 

2 §>£ 
CT c= 
Q. C CT 
= CO ~ 
12 ^ 


P 
>< 
O 

c 
CT 
£ 
CD 
P 

c 

_ o 

< O 


CO 

p 


CT 
O 

o § 

g P 
o £ 

CD *- 

'5 ° 

CL 0 

P C 
CT O 
h- CL 


I £ 

CT CD 

P 

ll 

CT X 
P P 

<3 

8? 

E 2 

CD 

S’ ° 

0 o 
E o 

0 JO 

- o 


8 1 

« g 

0 

O o 

.0 


3 

n 


0 


O g>l 

CT c O 
^ CD O 

JI 

P O O 
^ §2 

■= O « 
CT ■*- 2 
= CD o 
g CT O 


CT 

P 

P 


O o 


p "8 

p E 
E 2 

p § 

0 Q. 
CT O 

X P 

— CT 
P — 

P Q 


CT = 
4- ffl 

o ■— 

p 2 

8 p 
o ® 

CT g 


.9 jg- 8 

?1 ® 
P -2 >4 

2£0 

CT "O w 

3 c p 
o p -g 
0 c p 
c o 

0 JC 

'ilf 

E p fc 

■55 E -c 

c .5 .2 

o p -g 

O p g 


® i 

SI 

c o 

P o 
3 .2 

fi 

5* 

O) -= 
O) ® 

0 > 

CT £ 
p 0 
CT P 


CT 

C 

CT 


0 P 
■= CT 
CT P 
C CT 

® O) 
>»,9 

2 i 

> « 
.g Q. 

CT P 


C <0 

o >- 

CT P 
CT CT 

.2>E 

•CT 3 


CD 

CL 

CO 


h- 

X 

CO 


00 

'O' 

X 

CO 

z 


5-35 













2* 
05 = 
C XJ 

s'g 

1 » 
2 a) 

x 


■D 

c 

to 

d 

_l 

CO 

o 

d 

x ^ 

LU -I 
LL CO 


■a 

c 

CO 

d 

_l 

CO 

o 

d 

cc ^ 

HI -J 
LL CO 


o 

_l 

CO 

o 

•O 

c 

CO 

o 

cc 

UJ 


o 

_l 

CO 

o 

"O 

c 

CO 

o 

cc 

LU 


-O 

c 

CO 

d 

_l 

CO 

o 

d 

CC 2 
UJ -I 
LL CO 


CD 

4^ o 
<*> 
d> c 
u o 
c = 
CO CO 
O 05 

w 

CO 


< 

o 

LU 

o 

E c ^ 

5 g = 

cn C ^ 

O C 7 )i 5 
_J 55 O 


< 

o 

LU 

o 

ll = 
• 

« F W 

j«o 


< 

o 

LU 

o 

§1 = 

£ O — 

« ^ w 
8 05JS 
j «o 


< 

O 

UJ 

O 

|1 = 
£ o — 

cn C ^ 

_J 55 O 


< 

O 

UJ 

o 

ll = 

p o — 

g ^ w 

8 §>« 

JiO 


p 

c 

o 

o 


in 

LU 

_! 

CO 

< 

I- 


o 

05 

o 

k- 

0. 

c 

p 

S 

c 

CO 

Q. 

X 

UJ 

0) 

p 

75 

o. 

X 

.52. 

'co 

CO 

.c 

k_ 

o 

z 

0) 

£ 


E 

co 

i_ 

05 

O 


O) 

c 


c 

o 

V* 

CO 

05 


CO 

05 


o c 

X CO 

it 

■*- CO 
05 05 
C J= 
o5 w 

O Cl) 
05 £ 
CD 

3 O 


05 

C <- 

m 5 ® 

w ° -o 
05 = CD 

-C o 05 C 
05 7 = 

To g>si 

c i O 5 

o o cd n 

5 C II CD 

5? m "O ■— 
O CO — cO 
Q. o 


I § 

O -O 


ii 


CD 


CD 
O 
C 

CO 5 

3 3 

CO 05 
0 ) T 3 

8 2 
w o 

8 

O -O 

o 3 

if 

is 

** 
co -o 

■c £ 

O 05 

Z E 


O m 


05 
C 
CO £ 


_q TO ‘5 CO 

® n 
05 CD 73 


C 

CO "O 

•S -§ 

03 w 
C CD 

S 5 


c C 
05 05 
X £ 

05 — 

® | 

05 2 o 05 

C Q.~ 0 ) 

I s a| 

b g -b £ 

X 5 _ Q) 

m c ^ 
c 2 o 5 

To | 2 § 
® ® ® ‘To 


co 

CO 05 

CO To 

.c — 

"5 o 

O CO 


05 c 

g| 

CO X 

-ex 
2 °a 
.2 r 

•o O 

c w 
CO “ 
.Q c 

>» 05 

5 05 

CO 


C CD 
co o 
c 2 05 
_C 0 05 

X 05 


O 


05 

05 

13 

CO 

03 

CD 


3 O 
CO *♦- 

8 J2 

E g 

05 X 5 


055 P 
05 5 
> S 


o x: 

i i £ 

o £ ° 

Its 

*i« 

oi 

> O 05 
— O > 


O g 


05 


X a 05 
o 3 05 > 

2 c -a 

U ?§ 

05 -c . 
■- ± 73 
r- 3 05 
C O ^ 
O O 
O 05 
E 05 
o .a 

— 2 
2 = 5.8 

CD « g 

£ ® 0 ) 
UJ 

° 2 
" co o 

Q 5 ~ p 
03 ■S 

= C E 
ro > « 
-o 2 o 

3 Q-p 

§ o co 

g N 
- C CO 
.2, cfl X 
03 qI 

“ o £ 

COS 
O X CO 
Z CO g 


05 


~ a. 

Q. 05 
w C CD 
CO 3 £ 

cor 

35 5 O 
O c Q. 
£ CO 3 

w 5= 8 

05 O S 
£CJo 

C x -O 

S“ 5 

g c ° 

8^o 

E 3 O 
o 1/5 

P CO 05 

- ® E 
05 E -J= 

05 


05 
05 
>, 05 

05 n 

CO ^ 

O’ 

-o 03 


05 

05 a, 

•- > 

» ® 5 ? 


o 
c 
^03 


CO ■*“ 
c -2 
^ To 

CD = 
^ c 

CO 05 

c o 

•- Q. 

Q) CD 

To £ 

5 CD 


C 05 

g .2 To 
o r, g 

c 05 
c 05 

. _ -t —■ 

_ S 05 

o C £ 

o o r 
o o 
°o>- 


c 

CD 


CD 


o £ .® 


-o 

— CD 
-r, 03 O -O 
S ♦- O O 
o O X 3 CO 
O C 


CD 


O O 

2 E 


CD 

CD 

C 

o 

Q_ 

CD 

CD 


C 

03 

S § 05 

♦- o c 
® 

£ c/> 

. 03 

5 2 

05 O 8 

•on 


o 

S 

CD 

o 


CD w 

> o 
o — 

O C 
T 3 05 

3 2 

O O 

g W 

.« « 
CO 05 
CD E 

£ 73 

£. o) 

O Nl 
Z M 


5 p 
w o 
| o 

2 o 
■o E 

C 05 

I “ 

> co 


05 CD 

To ^ 
g s 

o 
o 
g 

OT 

co 
o 


05 
C 

O 

Q CO 

^ f -5 ^ 


•- C ^ E 

£ 03 > CD 
^3 o OC -c 

§|o o 


CD •- 
N -o 

E 2 

| 2 

E w 
2 ^ 
O E 

® I 

O E 

8 - c 
E o 
a> •■= 

S-f 

1 E 

ii 

CD 
CD 
O 
> 

CD 
T 3 


03 

C 

CD 

CD 

O 

u 

O 

E .E 
o 2 

t= Q 

O CD 
C 

03 C 

C 03 

= 01 

‘ 5 l 

0 ) 4 = 

■O « 

— 03 


CD 

-§ d 

05 X 

-8 
£ ® 
03 

§i 

“ g 


T 3 

05 

05 

05 

CO 

05 

CO 


3 C _l 


CO 

05 

05 

CO 


o ■=, 

> 05 
s -O 
cd 

■O -o 

CD - 


jC 

2 

co 


sss z 

05 

u O CD 


ZOo 
O 05 O 
= SZ O 
c 0) “ 

§ g .2 2 


'73 o | 

Q. 05 < 
05 o X 3 

.2 05 E 

X 3 _ °3 

>. £ 05 
05 E CNJ 

»- C CL 

05 CO m 
c x: x 
05 o Z 


73 
35 O C 
£ r CO 


k— 

03 

o 

CM 

CD 

'P 



o 

C /3 

O 

3 

3 

05 

k_ 

05 

o 

C /3 

3 

c 

03 

8 < 

c 

o 

L_ 

0 ) 

£ 

CD 

CD 

c 

b 

g 

03 

o 

■*—> 

CD 

E 

o 

n 


CO 

X 

< 

■O 

c 

CO 

00 

cvj 

X 

CO 

z 


•O 

05 


05 

05 

O 

05 

CO 

05 

E 

c 

o 

o 

05 

E 

05 


05 

CD 

W 


CD 

O 

o 

00 c 
8.2 
E 73 

g f 

c ^ 

05 

CO 


< 

o 

LU 

o 

c 

co — 
2 = 
it: 05 
C 05 
05 p 

d o 


< 

o 

UJ 

o 

■*—> 

c 

03 — 
o = 

it= CD 

c 2 
O) 

iy) O 


< 

o 

LU 

o 

•*—* 

c 

CO 

2 — 
it 05 
C 05 
05 p 

d o 


< 

o 

LU 

o 

c 

CO -—- 
p = 
it 05 
C 05 

os ra 

d o 


< 

o 

X 

o 

c 

co ^ 
2 = 
it 05 
C 05 
05 p 

d o 


o 

CO 

Q. 

E 


CD 

05 

=} 

CO . 
o C 

•o .2 
3 w 
o 2 

O CD 
05 v- 

.2 c 

"O to 

O 

-1 

<D 03 

CD 


CD 2 


CD 
CD 
03 
0 

3 
O 

•“ 3 ° 

9 -or 
_ ° 2 
05 >% '.C 

- o 

o2 
_ CD 
CO 


o 
c 
X T 3 


O 

CD 

f o 

■= o 

k- ' 4 - 

o c 


CD 

03 

C 

'■M 

03 

c 

E 

03 


3 
O 
CD O 


CD 

j£ % 
03 O 


03 

CD 

03 

3 


C 

O 03 
v ° CD 


03 


03 


03 


— 03 

O © . w 

p C >9 
o o w 

§50 ^ 

3 o £ - 
O o 3 -t 

£ JE ° § 

CO ±= 05 g 


3 

.c 

05 


O 

o 

05 


co £ 

05 P 

.2 £ 

0 > g 

S,.c 


o E 

CO 
C CD 
CD i: 

£ 52 


c 

o 

05 

O 


2 2 

Pc 
>> o 
X o 


- g 
£ o 

c ^ 

<D TU 
CD 

CD o 
® 3 
3 73 
8 £ 


£ 05 _ 

8 £ ffl 
■fc 5 ^3 
« JC c 

g I ®. 

O X 05 

s ©I 

CD £ CO 
•— o ±= 

Q. 05 £ 
C 0)~ 

.2 co g 


CO X 3 
>- -O 
o co 

05 "to 

c .2 

b £ 

o 05 
o £: 

05 O 


05 

3 

V « 

c X 

CD _ 

O g 5 

®1 

C/5 iL 

° ™ 
O 05 

o .2 

CD C 
•C 05 

I— i= 


CO 

o .2 

p"° 

E co 

05 O 

■4—» — 

co r 

CD CD 

E 


05 

C 05 
•O C 

o = 

•o -o 

k. -O 
8 ® 
o f 


T3 
Q5 
05 

“ c 

CD 
05 

co 

CD 


CO 


c 
o £ 

.2 -b 


2 o) n 

O OS O 
O C 05 
° '05 CO 
■SS 05 - 

8 2 -- 
b ° ^ 
£ O p 
Jr co 
lj cd 

< X sz 


c - CD 

k_ 

3 
* 

o 

03 


CD £ . 

i§ 

W -O E 

§ 8 « 
05 - C 

05 E = 

05 ° 
C 05 
■f= 05 

3 03 
8 ® 
CD 05 


C — 


C « 
O >- 
*= 05 

co jn 
.2>E 

- o 


05 

'O’ 

X 

CO 


o 

in 

X 

m 

z 


in 

x 

co 


CM 

m 

x 

co 


co 

in 

x 

co 


5-36 














c 

o 

o 


LO 

LU 

_l 

CD 

< 


C 

o 

"« 

c 

© 

Q. 

X 

HI 

© 

c 

"55 

g. 

E 

jo 

'© 

a 

x 

k. 

o 

z 

© 

x 


E 

© 

w 

05 

O 


05 

C 


c 

o 

© 

05 


05 = 
.5 x 

5 g 

E o 

o CL 
£ w 
2 CD 

cc 


CD 

£ u 
<^‘ 

CD C 
O O 
c = 

CO CO 
O 05 

"E ■ 

05* 

CO 


CO 

05 


CD 

k_ 

o 

ffl “• 
“ c 

S -5 

E c° 
S f 

1 i 

05 

w 


o 

fO 

X 

E 


C O 
O k. 
= CD 
CO JO 

.E 5 E 

— 3 


X 

c 

CO 

o 

_l 

CO 

o 

d 

cc s 

111 _l 

U_ CO 


< 

o 

LU 

o 


CO 

o 


c 

3 

« E « 

£ 05« 
_J © O 


o 

2 X 

c - 

CD CD 
05 .c 


05 


CD 


5 .§ 

O X 
= CD 


CD 

X 


C O CD 
CD C/5 73 

~ s ® 


£ E 

Ol C 

c c 
o 


X 

W 

W 

o 


2 '© S 

X E _ 
CD CD CO 
C/5 c/5 
O C 

9- ° 

O O 


E W 

2 8 
05 

2 c 
x o 

05 2 
.2 2 
.2 To 
co c 
1 = o 
o 

"co CD 

c .E 

CD _l 

i< 

O CD 

5S 

CD o 

■2 td 

CD 
CD 


c o £ 


X CD 
E CD 
03 X 

s I 

§.3 

O O 

P"o 

i 2 

§1 

k. 

. <D 

§1 

o i 

■c 2 

£ 05 
C/5 <*- 
CD 
CD 


CD CD 
2 £ 
c »- 
o o 

- 52 
o c 
g .2 

f-TN CO 
CO 

.E 3 
c o 

C 

‘OiTD 

8 * 

2 ? 
O O 

© .E 
^x 


C/5 "O TO 
05 CD C 
O p CO 
® O 

S"*T 


CO eg 
c — 


05 

2 2 
£ Z co 
w 05 55 
© 2 X 

o C 

Q) • - CO 


Q m CO 


© .— © 


£ w = sr x 


O t ii 5 

k- ctC 05 > 


£ c 


c £ 

2 2 
05 ° 
05 
05 

05 fc 
05 CO 


m— O CD 
0 0-0 

_£ © 

>5 05 LL 

05 c 
O o CD 
O ° o 

r-j h— •— 


2 o 

»♦— 

E 05 

§ .2 

iT5 
o c 

— CD 
05 X 
X . . 

05 
05 Q5 

I ;I 

. . 

o 
03 


CD O 

8 "£ 

CL CD 
X 


© 2 
05 CD 


O CO 


XX 

C 


U 

CD 

X 

05 


£ © rE 
3 E 

p © 

O Q. 

I •- 


CO - =* 

co co E 

m n n 
E CD 


t 

o 


CO ^ 

To a 

CO 05 
05 

# 2 

I § 

Z 05 


05 !£ 
-Q ^ 


-O s 

2 05 
P CD 

I 2 

Q. C 

E ° 

.E o 


.E 05 

c o 
2 Q. 
IT 05 

co x 
c I- 

CD 

E ST 
c 5 

2 ? 

g ? 

D £ 
C 05 
CO -o 


CD 

05 ~ O 
_ 03 *J= 
^ a) a 

C k- Q. 

co co co 

-.2 k. 

c X CD 

2 Q- td 

3 5 § 
n 05 3 
'£ o » 

« g, ® 

U Q5 Q5 

x a. 

>5 -'05 
05 C 
O •= X 

, O S o 
!o g 05 


o 

E 

05 

c 


o 

05 
CO 
CD 

E 

9 3 

.2 "o 

_Q> 05 
O O 

= <f) 

"x 
W CD 
c 3 
o 


o 

CD 
O 

c 

co 

tr 

Q. 3 co 

E c .2 
©0=5 

X o © 
_ I— Q. 
T3 (/) 
c . ^ 
03 co 2 
• •* 0 £ 
CO 

IIS 

E <D3 
05 E ^ 


® w = 

3 

V) 

Td 
o 
c 
2 
*o 

3 
© 


© 

3 

O 

tr 

© 

CL 

© 


o o 

© ^ 
C -O 

o c 

“1 
*5= O 


© 

X 

g 

05 

c 

b 

3 


© 

CL 


05 

LU 


=) T-l ^ -P k. = 


05 ir W 
£ £ © 
’© © 3 

© 00 "O 

05 O 05 

> 05 2 

C Q. 


© 

•2 a. 

© 


_ o 

3 C © 

cr o 
© = 

>- o „ 

05 35 X 
P 22 

o 3 

a. = 9 
© © > 


o Tt 


© 

TO N 

© kr 

£ = 
c « 

© 9 

X c 

TD 2 

3 « 
O >> 

g ® 

CO ^ 

o ^3 


O 

c 


°1§ 
® g‘"5 


— C ^ 
-Q •- CD 

CO ^ 


0 

0 

c 

a> 

co 

0 

T3 

TD 

C 

0 

0 


o 
0 
JD 

’co 

C 


© X 2 .2 

N -^ © O 
X TD TD <15 
O q © Q. 
X 2 LL « 


•-S5 CO 


w g- 


CO 


0 O 


CD O 

2 Q. 


© = '05 

o gm 

0 0 Q 

E 

E .© ® 
c E | 

O O o 
c o £ 


© 

x 

© 

o 




o = 

© 05 

£ c 
c o 

2 © 

C-5 CO 


© 
c" © 

© js; 

«l 

© « 
o © 

© k. 

Q. O 
M © 
TD 05 


©yjj ♦_/ u 

«— <— —5 


0 

0 

C 

O) 

CO 

0 

■O 

T3 

c 

0 

0 


c 

8.3 = 

© © © 
ns rn 


© © 

>- © 

si 

2 .2 

Is- 

o2^ 
X CL . 

g — © 
-* © © 
TD 


O 3 

|| 

©.§ 


■° © 
X X 
3 “ 

1 o 

2 co 
g -o 


~ 05^ 


^ “J £ — •= © 


— xx 


c p = 


X 

X 

© 

© X 

o o 
c © 
.2 o 

o-E 

5 © 


© 05 
© .2 
© c 

STB 

->5 U. 

o — 

x £ 

E 8 

LU E 


o 

g 


a 5 
c 

3 

E 

E 

o 

o 


3 

O 

g 

© 

'© 

CQ 

x 

X 

o 

Z 


w 

w 

3 


co © © 
2 E 2- 
x c 
© o 
c £ 

.2 > © 
O © 05 
13 -*-• — 
k- O 0 

© .2. o 
co© 
o k- x 
o Q. « 


o -- 

•2 E 
© 

© © 
•'S 
o co 

X X 

• ■■ 

8 ° 
10 c 
© O 

o © 

— o 

© L= 
© = 
© c 

— © 

© ."2 


c _ 


© TD 

r- ® 
© © 
05 © 

c C 

15 

2 § 

© g 

© = 

3 .2 
CO CD 
0 O 
0 o 
C 'jO 


>5 

c 


0 _ 
o 

11 
iS c 
c © 

g ^ 

E © 

£ c 

15 
= .© 
O 05 

11 

0 -Q 


.g 0 

O o 
Q. O) 
Q..E 

■5 5 

W 1_ 

c ° 

E ® 

© ^ 

2 =5 

05 W 
© © 

© £ 

E o 
o — 
w 
o .2 

© o 

• U» . 

E © w 

C 05 © 

© co p 

X CD <15 

E 5 « 

.i= CO © 

lis 


Z E o 


< 

a 

LU 

o 


c 

© ^ 
o = 
b w 
c w 

05 JO 

CO O 


> g> 

o .E 

E > 
© — 
w w 

X C 
3 « 
O X 


o 


© 


C 3 

5 3 

o © 

£ © 
w 5 

R °- 

o © 


. © 
9 © 

x O. 
05.2 
•c X 

Se 

11 

£ X 

O 3 

o o 
© ® 
X X 

■*■' c 

E « 

X >k 

x © 

g g 


■2 .2 I 

E | B 

S 05 O 

3 O 8 

^ ° £ 

iS o to 

0 C 

"c o 
-2 © O 
O o 

^£.05 

"2 as 


0 
C 
0 

O- >D 

CO = 

^ 0 

S o 

© X 

© £ 

"5 2 

2 >* 

X X 

w _ 

^ © © 05 

o IP X X 
£ x 


© 

X 

05 TD 

C c 
o © 

© >< 
— © 
£ g 

i-s 


© 

© 


© 

5 
© 

X 

© w 
£ & 
05 = 

•i 8 
Ex 

© C 


X >> 


© 


© 


!_ C O 

O O g 


05 ® 

© g c .£ 
£ x 




£ c £ .£■ 
© © ro x 


= ° 

m ^ 
© © 

£ > 

© O 

»- © 
© — 
X © 


£ 

IT5 

CL 

CQ 


5-37 


















>> 
cd = 
c n 

p'« 


o 

CL 

W 

CD 

cc 


0 

u 

<„- 
0 c 
o o 

C -J= 
0 0 
O 05 

p 

CO 


c 

o 

o 


If) 

UJ 

_J 

CO 

< 


c 

o 

w 

c 

0 

a 

X 

UJ 

0 

c 

0 

a 

a. 

0 

"0 

m 

JC 


0 

x: 


E 

0 

i_ 

05 

O 


05 

C 


0 

05 


0 

05 


W 05 
> r- 

2 § 

£ o 

O "O 
W T-t 

£ .2 
o ~ 
© © 

©3 

W — 

0 w 
‘o to 
0 2 

ii 

El 

8 ■g 


32 
o 
o 

$ - 

To £* 


■2 CO 


c 

0 

fC 

0 

w 

o 

E 

o 

c 

0 

!5 

0 

JZ 

CO 

0 

'o 

© w 

•O > 
0 ~ 

.2 0 

0 ° 

© 2 
>, W 

0 C 
£ ° 
o 0 

W -C 
© a 

•So 

CD *+- 

m © 


0 

x: 


05' 

© ^ 
o o 
E 

E © 
o g 
° 0 
c x: 
0 o 

1 > 

§ § 


WWW 

"2 '«c 
o CO* © 
OQ !2 
c O 
O .C c 
■Q "C 
o O JZ 

— o 


3 CD .5: 


3 

CO 

2 © 

0 -c 
o 

C CL 

o 0 ) 


CC 

~ E 

c 

E 


o 

CD 

22 

o 

w_ 

0 

X 

0 


O — 


© o 

0 B 

CL E 

© w 

° s 

£r- o 


0 c 
c o 
c ~ 
o g 
w p 


0 0 
■c -c 
o 

M 

11 

.E as 


.-r_ 

FT 


co 

O 5j* 

Z T3 


8 .g 
o B 

0 


^ ? p t 


0 

Q- £ 


c 
0 

0 ©> 
> .© 
"O -O 
0 0 
C 0 


T) 

o 

o 

5 

co 

0 

0 

>. 

o 

Q. 

E 

0 

■O — 

C LU 

a c 

W 0 


g <j> 
o > 
O 0 
§ £ 
w >> 
■o £ 

0 C 

2 8 

8 V 

0 CO 
o CO 

o o 

0 . 

> w 
O 0 

0.2 
Q. 0 

™ c 

c -2 

0 O 
0 2 

> w 

CO c 

O 

E 

o 


© 0 


C 0 ©? 
0 = oo 

E C ■'fr 

0 

cl-S) w 
■5 OQ. 

0 © c 
•o £ © 

c-l| 


CD 
CD 
CD 

a © 
o -o 

7 © 
^ 0 
<5 P- 
>. w 


0 

'0 

CO 

.c 

tr 

o 


0 o 

O 2 


CD 

05 

CL-^ 


sz 

o 


-C 0 

II 

O O 
•O 0 

a. c 

CD o 
1 — 

0 


.>• c: 
p 


w' W CO 


o 

w 

CD 


P O 

2 >> 
0 3 : 

C5 

c © 

0 = 
O T) 


ii 

CD CD 
~ p 
w g 
x ■© 


X3 
0 
C -p 

1 8 

c o 

10 


g 0 

E^ 


o 
•e 

2 c 

CD 

•- 05 


0 


0 


_ w 

>> 3 

£ © 
O x) 


0 O TJ 

0 c s 

1 _ O 0 

o i m- 
o 

i w ^ 

^■O 0 

c 0 -tr 

O 0 X) 

O Q. 0 

o w .c 


5 0 

I > 
0 ~ 

2 | 

P -O 
0 O 
© p 

0 5 

C .tf 
0 — 
0 

o x: 

§ © 
^ 0) 
“O "0 
C 0 
0 W 


w~ >_ 

■g © 

o “■ 
J= © 
0 

f E 

2 s if) 
■E CM 


W 0 


0 
c 
o 
w 
0 
© 

L_ 

c 
CD 
o 

8 © 
.2: 0 

> 0 
Q. 
CO 


ii I Its 


o © 

>,0 


w 

0 


p 
c 


5 = 0 

o x: 

« C 
0 ) -- 


^ E 


o © 

: aS 

© p 
x > 
0 1 


0 


0 


0 


c 

O "S 
0 
+-< 

2 0 

3 C 

1 = 

s O 
© -2 
0 ^ 
•5) 5 
o S 

2 ^ 
*JD W 


o 

0 

c 

o 

o 

3 


o 

0 P 

o 
o 
0 


© w 
> 0 
0 

If 

If 
0 ^ 
0 

O) 0 
4S-2 § 


0 

■4—< 

c 
0 
E 
0 
Q.P 
£ a. 

= <35 

2 •§ 

> 5 
o -o 


•O T3 

c 0 

0 W 

o 
c o 
.2 CD 

8 © 


s © 
© £ 
E ° 
5E 
0 


*S © £ ic z £ -s* ©-S£ 

0 


c © 

8 © 

CL 

JD ^ 
Q_ 


0 
c 
0 


■O 

0 


0 


P- w 
© 2 
-2 §■ 

E a. 


CD .N 


0 
£ 

O © 

£ .© 
3 0 

< CO 


0 

0 w 

II 

-O ■© 

C 0 
0 o 

w —' 

0 -O 

0 © 

0 o 

CL a> 
W Q. 
■O x 
0) © 

© 2 
2= X) 


2 ■£ 
!q o 
cd © 
x: >. 

— o 

“ s 

UJ 05 
W 0) 

:© e 
0 0 
m i 
x: o 
t: c 
o - 
z 0 


| 0 


*- o 

c 0 

— CL 

w © 

© "2 

w © 

0 w 

£ ~ 
85 

I 8 

T3 »- 
C 3 

© 2 
- 0 
W 0 

.2 E 

© r- 

© O 
CL .2 

© O 
"O 0 

£ o 
£ o. 


~ © ir 


0 

© £ 
CD X5 

© 2 
E I 

0 > 
- w 
0 
■O 

2 > 

g -x= 

o 
0 


f § 

11 

o © 

Cm 

*- o 

■O *“ 
0 CO 

£ © 
o 

E « 
0 0 ) 
>>£ 


_CD 

3 

O) 


*D 

C 

0 

-C 

0 


0 
0 0 


0 


0 
O 

c 
0 

2 | 

0 

E 


"O Q) 

c > ^ 

© -^ m 
^ O © 

0 0a 

11 s 

1 2~ 


0 


O 

5 

E 

o 


"O 

0 


o 

iZ. 

Q. 

0 

n 

o 

o 

5 

w 

0 

Q. 

g 

w 

0 

E 

o 

■o 

"O 

c 

0 

w 

E 

© w 

0 0 ) 


o £ "o u_ w 


0 

k_ 

o 

0 

C0 J 


8 .2 
© 0 
© = 
c ^ 

05 

</) 


o 

0 

Q. 

E 


C n 
O >- 
•f= 0 
0 X) 

,2 s E 

■t; o 


If) "O 

11 


5-38 











2? 
o> — 
E -Q 
o g 
c o 
o ©• 
S © 
oc 


CD 

C o 
<* 
a> c 
o o 

C ■•£= 
co CO 
o 05 

E ; 

g>“ 

a) 


c 

o 

o 


in 

LU 

_l 

CD 

< 


C 

o 

<A 

C 

CO 

a 

x 

ID 

CD 

C 

© 

a. 

CL 

©^ 

‘co 

CD 


a> 

£ 


E 

CO 

k_ 

05 

o 


05 

c 


c 

o 

L—< 

co 

05 


CO 

05 


CO -o 

1 § 
2 CA 
© 
CA O 
CA ■= 

8 ® 
O > 
CO »_ 
CD 
O) £ 
c c 
o => 

CO ^ 

o 

£ O 
C — 
CO ■© 


§ o 
~ o 

O "D 
C 

CA CO 


CD CA 

E O 

CD -p 

-Q © 

CA > 

CD O 
o C 

© -j—r 
£ ^ 

CA ® 

<o E 

3 05 

■s w 

CO £ 

GA O 
_ CA 
■2 « 
g .® 

Q_ © 
“ 2 . 
o w 

CA 
CD 3 
O -3 

c j« 
a) ca 

CA — 

CD CO 
Q.O 
CD 

0) CL y 
£ CA § 
*“ CO 


a> 


CA 

CO 


cO £ 

E SB 

■= O) 

CD £ 

£ £ 
CD 
= N 


£ C 

3 « 

II 

§ 05 

co O 
£ > 
£ O 
c > 
co .E 
.x 

CA 
3 

o 


CA —- 05 3 


C co 
.2 c 
.= CO 

2 O 

CD C 
CL CO 

o .2 


X < 

£ < 

~ CD 

®£l 


c 

'ca 

CA 

O 

L_ 

o 

3 

O 

i 

c 

a) 

CL 

O 

0 

-C 


*0 3 
0 0 


5 ^ 7= 

0 


0 ^ CD 0 

3 E >. s 


a) 

£ H? 


3 2 -o 
c - s: o — 


a) 

> 

o 

E 

CD 

0 


5 2 
© ^ 
-o >. 

CO c 

.2 o 

5 CA 
•2 © 

© © 

co c 

c & 

O P5 


L-* © 
© 


■x 


© 

c 

ro 

O 


c 

o 

o 

© 

£ 


C 

© 


O 3 
•*- . © O 

C C £ >> 

© © 3 - '£ 

E E 3 co 


o. © 

© E 


cr 

© 


3 ° 

o > 


o ® 
3 E 
3 © 

c O 
o 

O 3 
© ® 

= E 
© = 
.9- © 

X £ 


c 

■2 > 

£ 

© 

O O 
X X3 
© © © 

© 5 E 

E o -2. 

£ o S> 

° 5 

5* E CA 
>* 0 LU 


0 

-C 

4-^ 

0 

C 

o 

0 

> 

0 

O 

X 

0 

L. 

0 

xi 

4-^ 

O 

k_ 

o 

(J) 

0 


C m — 


2 

0 0 0 0 £' § •£ 


0 

CD 

3 

0 

0 

0 

XI 

O 

c 

0 


3 

0 

C 

0 

> 

_Q 

*3 

0 

O 

0 

CL 

0 

_C 

0 

JD 

2 

3 

o 

£ 


> 

0 

0 

TD 

0 

E 

E 

■o 

c 

0 

> 

0 

*D 

L_ 

0 

CL 

0 

0 

E 

0 

0 


0 -g 
0 ^ 
rt 0 

S ® 

Q. “O 
W © 
© © 
3 O 

© ° 
GO 3 

© CL 
O © 
© — 
o >- 
CA O 
05 T3 
C © 
E Q- 

° m 
CL © 
CL «-> 
3 © 

© u. 
© © 


© © 
£ Q. 
E CL 
C 
© 


© 


© 


© 


CA 


© 


o 

-O ~ CO © 
C O) © gj 

m c © £ 


TD 

3 


0 


0 

C 


0 

CL 


r .t: £ t- 

£ _o o ^ 
o 
E 

3 

E 

c 
E 
ro 


£ 3 
© © 


. o 

05 5 


Q_ 


© o © X 
© c 3 •*- 


c 

© 

a. 

O 


J= c 
^ © 
o p 

® §> 

© w 

o © 

Q. 
Cl 


3 W 
_ © 
-C O 

05 © 
'© £ 
£ © 

3 W 
C © 

© 3 

o 3 

W 

« .« 
«_ o 
o © 

© S" 

a° 

§■ c 
w © 

o §■ 

8 § 
2 to 
o © 


3 C £ 

C © © 

© £ E 

_ 3 O 

05 © ^-5 

E © • 

3 © 

© w" © 
© © E 
© o 3 

p c c 
© © — 
© -3 E 

■° c E 
>> © • 
~ £’“ 
© O 3 
O ^ ® 
05 o ^5 

© LL © 
»- C 

3 . '© 

© 05 c 

11 1 


■O 

© 

© 

> 

o 

o 

Eg 
£ £ 
o i 

5 o 

4 —» 

XI c 
O) 0 

I! 

Sf 

c © 
© *- 
£ C 
O © 


© C 
© 

•£ © 

c £ 

« O 

. c 

o © 

■o 5 
2 i 

£ O- 
o g 
° © 

g>r 
•= o 


EE© 

.E c £ 

© © £ 
£ £ 3 

§Si 

O © 
§ 05 £ 

5 .E E 
« © © 
C 3 - 
© © 


© ~ 


3 

£ 

£ 

© 

4 —> 

© 

O 

o 


> 

© 

Q. OT 


£ ^ 
© y- £5 © 
£ £ £ C © 


© 

C £ 9- 

C o © 

co3 o 

© © CA 
CA £ © 


- £ 

3 © 
© O 
£ C 
© 

g - 

o ° 

1 © 
© E 

o E 

3 5 


« 

© 

'o © 
© 

£ O 
© x- 

>« 

£ © 
© © 
3 © 

.2 os 

— c 

© c 
_ o 

3 O 


E .2 © 

g^E 
> © o 

0^ 0 O 
© = 3 
CD c c 

£ 3 © 

O Ol 


- © 
>< o 
o o 

!l 

0 

£ c 
.2 » 
Q. ® 

II 

£ O 

ca © 
o © 

St 

x Q- 

© E 

si 

£ £ 
■© © 

£ © 
© o 
> o 

2 o. 
£ 

£ O 

© C 


© 

£ 


£ 

© ■■ 
n c 
o .9 


© 


© 


m 

© 

£ 

CO 

§ 

X 

© 


■O ~ 


E £ 

?| 

*1 

(f) = 

© o 


3 P © 

-X_ ■<—< 
© 

O Q- 
x E 
x g 
x © 

©« 
XI >% 

o 

i § 

5 S’ 

o S 

4 -> 0 

0 *3 
— CL 
=3 O 
0 £- 
c a. 
O £ 
o ro 


© © 
£ E 
w £ 

e8 

w © 


£ 

3 

O 

§ 

o 

£ 

5 


co 

c 

o 

0 

0 

0 

_Q 

O 

O 

0 

0 

0 

■o 

■o 

c 

0 

1/T 

Q. 

0 

E 

■O 

c 

0 

0 

> 


0 -tT 
■D 
C 

o 
o 


o 

0 

0 

0 

"O 

c 

0 

0 

0 

‘l. 

3^ 

’c 

O) 

c 

T3 

3 

O 

c 


0 

0 

XI 

■O 

c 

0 

c 

o 


0 
'CT) 

o 
= o 
< lo 


0 

0 

o 

0 

CL 

0 


0 

C 

c 

o 

0 

O 

o 


2 ? 
0 XX 
C 0 
0 0 
CD XI 


O 

0 

V— 

0 

XD 

E 


c 

o 


0 

O 


c 

0 

;o 

CD 

c 

■O 

_3 

o 

c 


0 

CD 

c 

0 

21 

o © 

GO CA 
© © 

05 -E 
© © 
o E 


£ 

C 

© 

E 

o 

i_ 

£ 

© 

> 

O 

E 

CA 

C 

o 

© 

o 

o 


© 

o 

"© 

CD- 


8.2 

I « 

8 .25 


c - 

CD 


0) 


O 

0 

Q_ 

E 


C ffl 

•1 © 
© £ 
.95 E 

3 © 


in £ 

x 3 

“ o 
Z o 


5-39 










S' 

os = 
c -Q 

S g 

c o 

o Q - 
2 w 
5E © 
cc 


® 

u 

C.O- 
© c 
o o 

C := 

ns © 

O 05 

I 

CO 


c 

o 

o 


in 

LU 

_1 

CD 

< 

I- 


C 

o 

'35 

c 

ns 

a 

x 

lli 

© 

c 

© 

Q. 

0. 

SS. 

‘ra 

CD 


O 

z 

© 

c. 


E 

ra 

w 

03 

o 


OS 

c 


c 

o 

’•O 

ns 

os 


© 

05 


© Q © 
'© Li. £ 
CD CD -O 

sz < m 
•c © ’- 
o £ C 

z o£ 

S « 5 

'5 E -g 
0 o S 

Q.Sb « 
« © = 
T3 O as 
© c -OS 

w “ 2 
= 05 
■a U- o 
©05 

= ° S 

F - as o 
“ 2 © 
o 


c o 

03 0 
_ 0 


3 

03 

O 


©1 
■a « o 

2« c 
•o § c 

©^ s 
© — 
OS JO > 

c — > 

■ 4 —’ >S 

§ '■5 g 
2 c o 


c 
5 

o . 

S- 2 c 

c 2 = 
© O ® 

£ -C E 

c « o 
° © H 

gsg © 

T3 © V- 

g ° © 

••- © Q. 
© 
x; 


IT) © T3 
o = © 
1 - sz ~ 

o 5i 
£ © © 
2 © £ 
& — 2 
© "F 


- 8 
LLJ 5 

■O CD cO 
© 0 
£ © 
05—1 

<= O 


© 


© 


© § 

2 ° 

o 3 
co - 

E S 

- o 
o 


© 


— © 
os xi 

fa, 


o 

CD 

O 

c 

03 

> 

"O 

03 

c 

■O 

0 

CD 


£ CO E 


©as 


© © £ o 


JO o = 
2 © © 


o 

5 


© 


s= — o £ -a 


© £ 
© «- 
*- o 
>,o tr 

E 5 


- 2 
o £ 
>> t 
— o 
o ° 


c £ ~ 
o o < 
0.0 
O 5 £ 


o c 
© .2 -o 

| 8 5 

■o°? 

© rs c 
© o 
■o £ S. 

©■On 
2 = © 
— 2 © 
o 5 -o 


E|m 5 
© 

£ os co ^ 


Y o 
x: ©‘ £ 
CT 2 os 


•E □ .£> as 


CD c 
© 2 
£ as 
o 

os Zz 
c w 

O C 


£ W 
— X 
© © 


O c 
as o 

X3 o 

-o © 


c 
o 

•= -c: 

© ~ 

•*—> __ 

© o 

© Q. 

© £ 

E © 

■o £ 
c .. 

© w 

c E 

£ © 1 
© w > 
>_ © 

O OS 

© 2 
w © 
as .. 

If 

o ^ 

o (/3 


2= ti ra 


© c 
£ .2 
05 CO 

w _ •§ as 
= 55 3 ? 


= £ E ^ 


© 

J© 


"O 

© 

© © 
o as 


« 

c 

o 

o 

© 

o 

TS 

© 

■C 

o 

© 


-Q 

o 

© 

o> 

E 


-O 


CO 

c 

o — ^ 

O 05 O 

■ 4 —' 

© © 
© x: 


© 


o 

O CO 
JO CL 

£ - 
5 © 
© © 
2 f 


£ -= <- © 


© © 
© c 
c C 
■F © 


o 

C/3 fr< 
CO 

03 0 

• S 5 
0 


as £ =o £ -zr 


o 
o 

5 . 

II 

as i= 
£ © 
x: c 
os o 
— o 


cc 


o o © 


a. 

Q. "co 

2 © 
£ © 
L. 

2=5 
« © 
© '*- 
© © 
' x: 


o 
w 
© 

— . 9 - 
os E" 
'as-c 

-o 

c os 
© c 

as S 5 

= w 


Q. 

E 

© 

ro 

2 

o 

o 

5 

as, 

’© 

CD 

x: 

c 

o 


c 

o 

© 

© 

© 

© 

05 

c 

■o 

© 

© 

£ 

© 


© 
> 

© 
w > 

© o 
« £ 
© C 

© © 
© *- 


© « 
£ 2 
© X3 
O 

© ® 
X2 £ 

o' ^ 
5 = 
J- n 

? © 
— M 

x: o 

.05 Q. 
© © 


*3 co 


o 

c OS> 
£ u! 


© 

05 _ 

«t ^o as 
© © " 


E os 
o c 
£ = o 


£ c 

2 E 
E as 

3 
0 


0 


~ CD 

l€ 

si 

1 § 
0 0 


O 0 
CD 

5 2 

O £ 
H -Q 


0 
osE 

c *- 

© c 
© O 
C © 

as © 
■o as 

2 os 

Q. £ 
2? 
S £ 

a xj 


© £ 
£ © '§ 
§ Q.-0 
© o £ 

2 £ © 
a o c 
0 0 
£ S.2 

o © o 
0-0 

© ^ as 

. < 2 
© as o 
?S5 

2 SS 

■C •■= © 

05 © ■*- 

-g Ss 

X® 5 

— E 
§ E o 

If O 05 

55 a a 
© © — 


?S 

8 § 
*0 0 
o g 
as ^ 
§ o 

£ 8 

.© c 

2^ 
2 © 
-Q as 
■o £ 

S E 

I! 

o 
o 


as = 
£ c 


c 

o 

■O 

c 

o 

o 

© 

© 

« 

■O 


o 2 

‘^3 0 
0 "O 

S § 

O o 
as -o 
as 

eg © 
« £ 


O 


CD 

^ rr 


© 


© 05 

> as 

© X3 


C O 
X= O 

« § 
© 

C 0 
__T 0 
0 C 

ll 

as > 

c i 

O > 

© ^5 


- o >, 

■0—2 
© .© a: 

N — 2 
•o w 05 

o © as 
£ c c 

O © ffl 

© x: g 

© 
05 


© 

© . ,, 
® TS «' 

r- r~ r- 


^ 9 

2 os 
2 c 

1 § 
^ o 

I | 

as w 

I ° 

x: o 
2>® 


o 5 
o 
© fc 
£ as 
P c 


© 

a 

c 

© 

> 

T> 

© 

C 


g 
c 
o 

o 

5 -Q 
« as 
aa S 
as S 5 
o i5 

0 TD 

§ s 

Is 
© © 
£ © 


c a c 
o © ra 

o CD ^ 


© -o as .Y 


c 

2 as 


05 


os 


>_ . © 

■o £ 2 
-to 
g 0 0 

CJ CO Q_ 


0 
c 

_ o 
0 o 


0 


c 
o 

o _ 
® © 


i= Q- X3 


o § 
2 o 

« E 

£ 8 
- o 
o 


5 Q 
E O - 

8^2 
o £ © 

© ^ as 
© ^ a 1 - 

-c EL as 
os as 2 

Ilf 

£ 5 £ 


.b o 

© ^ 
c © 

£ © 

© m 

2 tr 
o 

•o z 
© . 
£ "o 
o c 
© © 

< i 


w ® 

© — 

© © 

< £ 

J 

0 T3 
0 0 

O rf 

00 C o 
o ® = 

— £ O 
£ © 2 
£ X3 vs 

*1 § 
0 o j: 
£ ^ o 


0 

1 _ 

o 

© 

CD- 

82 

E as 

2 f 

1 2 
05 

w 


o 

© 

a. 

E 


C a 
O >- 
x= © 
© X3 

.2> E 

£ o 


in o 
D. 

m § 

Z o 


5-40 











c 

o 

o 


in 

ID 

_i 

CO 

< 


c 

o 

co 

c 

<0 

CL 

X 

ID 

0) 

c 

0) 

Q. 

CL 

.2. 

co 

CO 


E 

co 

05 

o 

k_ 

Q. 

05 

c 


c 

o 

L-» 

(0 

05 


05 = 
2 JO 

| g 

o ®- 
= co 
2 CD 

cc 


0) 

CO u 
<* 

0 ) c 
o o 
c = 
CO CO 
O 05 

si 

CO 


03 

O) 


0 

W_ 

o 

*♦— 

0 

CO' 


8-2 
8 §5 

o — 

4-» 

1 s 

05 

w 


o 

co 

CL 

E 


C « 
O k- 
= CD 

co .o 
2 > E 

- D 


CD .C CO 
D O CO 

co ~ 

CD _ 
CD 

■a © 
S o 
® o 
© to' <0 

10 CD CO 


2 

3 

o 

5 


to “5 to 
c x c 
co § CO 

« ’© -2 

•2 a® 

E = 

Q © 


CD 


O 

sz 

*D 

c 

0 


0 
o = 
E o 

10 Q- 


0 

C 


0 "O 

® C 

o ® 
COO) 
<D <D t: 

is c o 
= © cd 
«-§£ 


-X C/5 
O ® 

§ o 
> CO 
*_ t 
O =3 
0 

C _ 
.2 *0 
0 0 
3 = 
O M “ 

c ^ 
o © 
o ~ 

CD 


- E 
< 8 


tO 

CD 

L_ 

3 

o 

c 

O nj 

o — 

0 _Q 
*“ *0 
0) 0 


0 q ~ 

E c 10 

_ o o 

CO o o 
co 8 § 

is® 

= ® c 
® £ o 
£ C C 
= CD 

to 2 _ 

© h- TO 
O TO 
C © 

CD > - 

■*- O O) 

t- E £ 

o © 05 
>- 05 
2 CD co 

o n «*. 


c c 
.2 .2 
o o 
2 2 
0 0 
C C 

o o 

o o 

2 ® 

1 ■! 

C 0 

s I 


CD 

® £ 

o 

8 c 

TO 05 ® 

« E 

3 
CD O 
_ -C ° 

0 

CD O -o 


E ® 

.Q 
O 
CO 


o 

o 

§ 


CD .bz CO 

£ ® ra 

co'-R 

2 E > 

^ P TO 


82 


tr 

co ~ 

£ ra ^ 
© n - 


CD 

05 

CO 

CD 


ra ^ 


O 2 d-£ « 


CD TO »_ 

E ® O 


tr 

o 


CD 


CO 


CO 


co 


c 
CO 
ro fz 

II 6 

co ® 
2 o ® 

co c Q- 


- JO 


3 

o 

g 

tr 

o 

CL 

CD 


CO 
£ 

CD 
CO CO 


CO »- 

> 2 

CO -CO 


•— 1 CO 


CD CO 
£ £ 
.2 a 


C TO 
CD CD 

E > 


-2 a) .b 


(D 


CO 


q.2 

CD 3 u» 
O o -X 
X > CO 

® £ to 

I §5 
if % 


> k “ 
C 0 
0 -Q 

£2 

2 o 
CD g 
® co 

CD 


E 

O 

CD 

L_ 

CO 

c 

o 

ffl 

o 

CO 

CD 


> TO £ ±= 


o 

CO 

o O 
CD CC 
‘o LLI 


CD 

sz 


LL 

CD 

JC 


CO 


o 

c ’ 

.2 2 

"■*—> 

® tr 

CD 


E 

o 


CD 


05 


© <2 
o £ 
CD - 
CL CD 
CO -to 
_ CO 

° O CD 

>■ co J= 
= CD ■“ 

co c 

•2 o § 
2 co £ 
2 CO TO 
a. 3 
to £ 
c > 

CO ’■© 

CO c 
CO — 

® 

c o 


CD 
> 
o 

% E 

CD 


o cd £ 

w k- c 

Q. CO CO 


c CO to 
o .2 £ 

CL— O 

3 co .2 


,2 (D g 
o -g O 

cd E t 

tz 3 3 
CD C D 


CO CL 

§ © 
2 £ 


c g 
1-2 
tr to 
o .2 

Q. ~ 
u. t3 
8 O 
£ £ 
O TO 

•® 8 
co E 

til 

CD o 
3 £ 

c o 

— w 

O ® 

to 2 
= o 


s ® 


CD 


co !2 « 
o o| 

= t > 

o © -® 
® O <0 
o g ® 

o-tr | 

2 Ro 

•*— CD 0 

g ■“ o 
era.® 
co c o 

8 ® 

s fi .S 

III 

£ CO TO 


In to 

11 


TO 

C 

CO 

d 

_J 

CO 

o 

d 

cc 

LLI 


CD 


o 

HI 

o 


I § = 

£ o — 
® F co 

g 05® 

_J M O 


co E 

CD — 

£ CD 

o ® 
° CL 

Z co 

f! 

to -E 


CD 


TO CD 


CD 


V*/ /— 

cd = .E 
- E - 1 

to V • 

CO® 
CO ^ © 

co' ® £ 

ra o c 

'8 « ° 


O 


CO 


o 


oo 

co 


CO 2; 

£ £ 8 
if Ro 
« •= 00 

p: 

8-.2H 
o to ^ 

CD CD C 
O ® 

2 to ra 

0-3 g 

o O © 
I— g JZ) 


< 

o 

UJ 

o 

c 

CO .—■ 
2 = 
co 

c 52 
o) ra 

co O 


g m rn 
£ <m © 
ra o5 ^ — 


CD 


£ CD - 
— > CD 

ra © © © 
gr 
cl o © _ 
2 w R § 

p P 


CD 


CO 


j O OO 

ca_ 2: 

ra o) © ‘o 
co c cl E 
coco ® 
tr c cd o 

2 £ E 2 

Z co c ^ 


CD CD 

® W 
O’ CO 
CD O 

"2 ra 

® To 

c .2 
E co 


DC 

< 


5-41 












05 = 

5 -O 

I'g 

o §. 
2 ra 
2 © 
X 


O 

_J 

cd 

o 

CT 

C 

CO 

O 

CC 

LU 

LL 


o 

_1 

cd 

o 

ct 

c 

CO 

O 

CC 

LU 

LL 


CD 

e o 

<xi 
CD C 
CJ O 
c -^= 
co co 
o ct> 

c ; 

CT)* 

CO 


< 

o 

LU 

o 

= c ^ 

5 8 = 

ra ^E w 
© cd — 
_J w O 


O 

LU 

o 

C ^ 
CO = 
^ o — 

<5 c $ 
8 0)2 
j mO 


CO 


c 

o 

o 


LO 

LU 

_l 

CD 

< 

I- 


CL 

C 

o 

'</> 

c 

CO 

Q. 

X 

Ol 

CD 

c 

© 

Q. 

CL 

CO 

'co 

co 


o 

z 

a) 

JC 


E 

co 

k. 

CT) 

O 


U> 

c 


<0 

CT) 


M 


CD 


© .p 

•4= CC 


p o p ct 

^ -n k- 


CO 

CT) 


CO 

W 

CD 

h_ 

CT 

W 

CO 

© 


© 

CD 


O). 

c 


c 
o 

o 

CT 

--I 

W 

c 
o 
o 
CD 

£ CD £ 


Sis 


CT 

o 


O P 


CD 


© ±= 


M 
O ® 

j: ® a> 


c 

CD 

E 

© 5 
Q.'> 

E 


ra © 2 


O > CT 

© = o 

8 E 

E S 
.E co 
c a) 

II 

O 3 
L- O 
0 ) CO 

■E o 
o a> 

-E *5 


o 

CO 

CT) 

C 

'i— 

3 

-o 


L_ 

$ 53 

CD > 

-c ir 

■c 

© 

CT) O 

2 o 

© o 
o © 


5 £ 

O aj 

1 

c 

© £, 
W CT 
© O 
§ « 
© 

© 

w £• 

2 i 

c ° 

© o 

ro "ct 
=0 2 
© -5 

° S' 

C fc “ 

z © 

.tr -Q 

£ P 

CD 3 
C O 

| 3 

co § 

-x: 00 

"O CD 
‘> JO 

~o -B 
c CO 
— o 

"co ^ 


CD 


CD 0 

t- 2.5 

Ill 


o 

2*: 

o 

CO 

ID 


c 

o 


o 

3 


0 = 


£ O 


II 


c 

ct 

I 

CT) 

c 

k_ 

o 

g 

o 


E « 
Q- © 
CT) © 


© « 
i= o 
i_ ct 
© ~ 
ct c 
2 ^ 
3 s 
>> ? 

g ? 
2 £ 




CO CO 
~ -C 

c 

CD c 
O o 
Q. © 
CO 
0 
CO 


0 
CO 
■Q CO 
0 O 

O © 

•C .c 


^ r> 

— ro 0 
C 

o 


0 
O 

C O 


Q_ 0 


0 


XT 
0 
k_ 

CT 

CT 

© 


C 

- o 

© ra 


o ° 


> *- o © 
~ © ^ 


ra 

CT 


© 


© 


© 

CT 

C 

CT 


C 
© 

m E 

© © © 

2 ° £ 
^ CT o 


••£= CT 


© © CT 

© = .E 

g-^ © 

© -Q 
CT 
© 


© 

E 


CT -E. L) 

CT O’ 3 

i’ll 

it CT O 


© ° 

.1 
CO '•*■* 
= © 
© CT 

g " 

' *_ 

^ O 

C V) 

© « 

E 2 

© CT 

© © 
CT) CT) 

< £ 

c 
CO .2 

E o 
2 ct 
© CT 
w w 

E § 

© o 


© CD 
© C 

o is 

O © 

O u .. 

T--- 0 £ 
r- © E 

■E CT CT 

CT *- © 
•■g CT)-C 
g C © 
-n 'E CT 


i_ 

© CT 
>- *- © 

2 8-S 


0 

0 

0 

0 

c 

o 


0 
> 

.2 ir 


TT 

3 


0 

O 

X 

0 


c 

^ ° 
^ 0 

0 0 
0 0 
0 0 
O 
O 


C 

o 

E 

o 


a 

3 

© 

c 

o 

o 

CT) 


© > 
CT CT 

"CT © 
CT £ 

I 2 


© © 


CT) 
-CT 
© 

ct © 


CT 

w O) C 
© .E ra 
"CT © 

E © w 
.2 © c 

O 

© Q. 
© © W 
CT) 

© -~ 

Q. CT) ‘ 


© 

© ra 

^ © 
>.-CT 
CT CT 
-CT « 
© ^ 
"o .2 


■ct 
c 

« , 
CO © 

5 W 

ll :t= 

ra ir 

ct o 

© 
© 
w 
© 
a 
© 
c 


© 


© O 

■2 2 -ct 
ro 2 3 
«- o. 9 

© p g 

§-■- ra 

o O CD 

ra £ 


W TO 
” © 


© 

c 

c 

© 

CC 

o 

c 


© 


a> 
o ° 
o ° 
2 cvj 

o. - 


© 


c 

.2 -o 


© 

CT 


O 
© 

E 

"© 
© "CT 
© O 

"CT .E 

'> 


■c 

o 

z 

c 

o 

o 

CT 


© 

C 

o 

o 


2 -CT -s o £, 


? c © 
•2 ra o 
^ o 5 
ct).2 , w 
— TD > 
0 0 
•O. ^ 

2^ 0 — 

E •- 2 

CT © 
O © O 
C CT O 


ro 

E 5 


2 CT O TCT 
© "CT © C 

© -S •*- ro 

.2 ra § § 

o ^ s>-«= 

2 S ra = 
© -CT E -CT 
ct ra © m 
o q-m- 2 
o ct o 2 


o 2 
o o 
>. Q- 


o o 


w 

CT 

-CT 


© © 
© © 
CT © 

> ra 
2 E 

Q- CT 

'S' ^ 

© « 

2 O 

^ LL 

© Q 
© r: 

© LJ 

II 


c 

.E 1 

>,Q 

S © CD 
CT == C 
© © CT 
-CT 2 3 

— E "o 

ora_ 

r cc © 

i 5 o *- 

. 0 

^ra g. 
gcc-g 
© 2 © 
si i 

o < > 

ra © © 
&2 2 


Otffl 

o o £ 
— © ra 

_ 0 11 

CD “O 

•E "co £ 

w o 

cn i- £ 

o © © 
o 2 -Q 

"CT '© "O 
© © 

ra c « 

a § ra 

2 © ° 
Q- © ra 
© 


© 


© 


2 a>‘ 
CT)§ 
,E c\j 
w . 

W i- 
2 ^ 
° © 
-o 2 
© 
w 

&tL 

O © 
Q- O 

© © 
CT -Q 


© O 
> w 

^ o 

O -CT 

p ra 
1^- 
<1 
5 ^ 

*" o 

-CT 

S S 

.E o 


0 
C 

*0 CO 
Q CO 


is O 
^ m 

0 “r- 


CD 


~ C 
0 ^ 


0 


0 
0 

0 
JX. 

L_ 

o 
g 
c 
o 
X r= 
© o 


-CT 

© 2 


c 

o 


CT) .2 
© - 
> 

2 - E 

CT 2 w 

©roc 

C ir O 

© Q o 


© 
ra 

o 

© « 

•♦—» ■— 

© i_ 

CT) © 
© > 

> if 


| | 
© < 


—. -n O 

ra ra g = 
© ra ® 
c 5 = 

ra < 2 

CC o o 

^ CO 

ram’© 

V*— L_ 

O 

0 CD 


0 

0 


0 _ 
= si & 

"cl 

2 © 
© © 
CT Q. 


CT 

"CT 

C 

o 

o 


© 

1— 

o 

ra 

m c 
8-2 
2 ra 
.2 ■? 

c ■ 

CT) 

CD 


< 

o 

LU 

o 

c 

© 

2 — 
2 « 
c © 

CT) © 

w o 


< 

a 

LU 

o 

•*-* 

C 

0 — 
O = 
i: 0 
C co 
CD _0 

(!) O 


O 

0 

CL 

E 


© 

© CT) 
CT C 

ra o 

© © 
ra „ 

>> © 

g JO 

2 I 

g g> 

E ra 
ra ra 
© >< 
ra 

g -2 

2 I 

ra 2 
o o 
CD a. 


CT 
r- ra 

§>8 

CT « 

co = 


© 

CT 


- o 
© 


« 

CT 

O 

Q 

O 

X 


© 

~ -o 

cc © 
o Jra 
© 2 

2 - 
o 2 
O = 

51 


0 

_ 0 
62® 
ra > 2 

c ra ct 
o « ~ 
♦= >> 
9 -a -ct 

d X 3 © 

w ra © 

o 2 o 

R ct o 
° © ra 
>> .2 © 
ct -ct © 


© o 
SO 

ei 

1 § 
2 -ct 
;*= © 
g ra 

Q. 

CD 


CT) 

C 

'© 

CT 

E 

o 


CT) 

C 


w 

© 


= -P o 


w ^ 


ra .p 


~ ra k; 
c E © 
o ra c 


-ct •> > c 


>. © 
-CT 

O CT 

CT CT) 

I "ra 

ra c 
g ro 


c ~ 
© ^ 
ra ® 

CT ^ 

2 ra 

Q- CT 
ct ra 
a-.2 
© -ct 


-P o 

® 2 p 
*- CT W 
© 


■2 8 


0 


-o| 

CT ID = 

© c 2 

CT © 2 


CT) 

’c 

© 

•CT 

© 

l_ 

k_ 

3 

O 

O 

o 

0 

0 


0 
L_ > 
0 0 

o 9 - ° 
□ i 5 x 

■O O 

oil 

ra § ra 

£ > Q 
8 ra ^ 
g 2 © 

—t L« C 

.2. o c 
© © 
CD « qc 

§ ! « 

Z ll 


CT 

O 

5 « 

o 2 

2 ra 
o © 

o- ct 
w 


« 

>. 

© 


o 
c 
ra E 

|g 
■© © 
CD ^ 

2 8 
I § 

Z o 


^ 3 
•“* 0 

7 S ^ 

0 O 
=T 3 

P 0 

’> CD 

~o c 
c *- 

— 3 
C TO 
° X 5 
0 0 
■m — 

o rt= 

0 

p- © 

E CT 


o ra 
2 © 
ct ra 
ra 2 
o ra 
ra. © 
o •= 


ra o p" 

•-T. X- © 

^ © LL 

i E 

ra © 


CT 

o 


ra © < 

115 

O O >- 
c a © 


C o 

o >- 
■^= © 
© CT 

2 > E 

•P CT 


co 

X 

< 


O) 

2 

X 

< 


5-42 











c 

o 

o 


in 

UJ 

_J 

m 

< 


o 

8 

'o 

k_ 

CL 

C 

o 

'35 

c 

re 

CL 

X 

111 

© 

c 

© 

a 

a 

a 

"to 

CD 


© 

.c 


E 

re 

k. 

05 

o 


o> 

c 


c 

o 

S 

c 

o 

♦r 

re 

CT) 


& 
CD = 
E lo 
o 

c o 

2 © 
2 <d 
a: 


© 

CT a 
<^- 
a> c 
o o 

C 

CO CO 
O ©5 

p 

CO 


CO 

CD 


0 ) 

k_ 

o 

o 

“ c 

8 -2 

8 s> 

E: v 

c ■ 

g> 

W 


o 

CO 

CL 

E 


O 

_i 

05 

o 

■o 

c 

co 

O 

a: 

UJ 

u_ 


< 

o 

UJ 

o 


c 

co 

£ 

co : 

CO 


c 

CO 

o 


co 

CO 

a o)i5 

• 55 O 


CD 

£ 

05 

c 

O 

E co 
eg co 
15 co 
co CD 
■C .£= 
= tr 
CO o 

E Z 

o sz 

"O 05 

C 3 

co 2 
= jc 
co •“ 
w "O 
*- <D 
8.2 
CL o 

-e* 

0 _Q 

11 

o 

§! 
CO CD 
O > 

CO CC 

8 - o 

2 T3 
co 
© O 
.L= o 

a o 


C 

0 

GO 

0 

C > 
© CD ? 
O r- £ 
03 ~ 3 
~Q >% O 

© -Q © 

£»i 
S? § 

C © ° 
(0 £ M 
>k p o 
•o o co 
O 8 CL 

fisi 

•2 co -D 

S £ o 

S O > 
CO CO co 

£ © 2 
o 2 co 
o> ® 2 
2 £ CC 

CO .-< 
o 7= CD 

k. <0 (]) 

© £ co 

gl» 

“si 

TD < </) 
CD . ■>, 

o CO 8 

2 co 2 * 

cl.c < 


© E 

si 

CO 3) 
O g 
CO c 
E o 

^ o 

CD CO 
SZ CL 

cl 

o 


co 


CD 

CD 

® CD 
> C 
© > 
CO 5 
CD .2 


03 

Q. UL 

•i| 

2 © 

8 < 
CO CD 
O £ 

© -r-i 

co E 

2 co 

3 C 

§2 

w Q 

E — 

o "© 

« c 

o E 
>. CO 
= GC 

O « 

1 2 


© 

CO CO 

3 © 

s ^ 

0 ) 

-Q C 

g‘S 

s I 

Q. © 

E © 

© CD 

© © 

-Q > 
xg £ 

* s 

Q. 

> 

-Q **" - 

03 © c 

■C .2 O 


03 


C O 
3 3 

11 
o o 
o o 


< 

O 

UJ 

o 

*—» 

C 

03 ^ 
O = 
itz c/> 
c <f> 
a) J5 
co O 


II 

03 

^ CJ 

I-i 

c >< 
© CD 
C © 
O 3} 

E 03 


C/> "O 

p 

o o 


co 

.— c 

£ « 

o E 

T3 CO 

c ■© 

03 5 

_ _C0 

© 35 

k_ ^ 

CD - 

8 : 

© 3. 
© 

© © 

E 3 

> J= 


0 »- 

■f=. 0 

in 

CD 

© J© 

in 

m 

.©» E 

0. 

CL 

- 3 

CD 

CD 

:> 2 

2 

2 


V) 

. « 

5 « 

j ® 

m © 

O g, 

co 8 
o © 

- £ « 

Uo« 

nr _ © 
fh T3 O 
UJ C © 
U. © C 


< 

O 

UJ 

o 


3 c — 
8 8 = 

© E © 
8 §>« 
_J w O 


■D 

8 f 

© © 
© is 
© © 


o 


!* 

© © 

Q.-Q 

— © 

o .© 
© o 
o © 


© 

W "D 

c ra 

.2 2 

o w 

o © 
©■ 70 © 

© -5 © 
11« 
g -C c 

.OS 
« •= CO 

«■§->< 
- > © 
© - 
CO O) 
—i © c 

J, O M 

< a: © 


CD >< 

c ■© 


c 

© 

p 

L_ 

3 

C/3 

X3 


Q.*5 


c 

CD 
X 
© 

00 

II 

2 2 

o © 

5 c 
> © 

© JC 

■© E 

cq 2 
© 
© 
© 


CT 

o 

•o 

c 

© 


■o 

c 

© 

c 

o 

© 


£ co ~ o 


tr 

o 


© 


o 00 

~ r-^ 

E 

8 w 

2 . rT 

"O © 
© O 
_>. CE 

© 73 

■P *- 
.© © 

© © 

E co 

lo 


c 
© © 
E 5 

CD © 
© .O 


O 

© £ 

5 5 
© c 
n 3 ) 

© x 
N © 

E © 


o 

8 © 

« .E 
15 E 
© < 

= © 

© £ © 
© © 

o o 8 

o © ^ 

?2S 

© 8 E 

« S| 

082 

© g >2 
— ~ © 

© © 2 
■c ^ 2 

** k- e 
O § 

"D E 
© © © 
© © CL 

8 8 .i 
2.E2 
| e g 
8 8 ^ 
o >,.©, 

*1 M ® 
k- 3 CD 

© O 


©.©EE 

© o" 

o CC 
© UJ 
U_ 
© 


5 8 
« © 
-© c 
© s: 
© 

O p 


^ c 


E 2 u- 


_.yc 

r >t 
5 £ o 
0.2 


tr 

o 

tr 

© 

© 

© 
to 
c 
o 

2 -o 
o c 
© © 
a. 

E to 
E 2 

ll 

S 2 

o © 
k- o 
w 

2 © 
© C) 

ll 

© P 
© 5 
c 
© 

Q. V. 

E 

O _ 
O o 


© 

*_ 

o 
o = 

2 ^ 

© .Q 

c 2 

— © 

3l 

CQ 03 
Q. 

E 


t< 

o © 

© 2 
~o 

2 o 


© © 
©c 

Eg 

© o 

E 2 


O 

u. 

Q 

O 


Q © — 


© 
CO 

re 
O © 

LL © 

Q 2 


© 

c: 


© 

2 •— © 


o o 
© >> 

2 73 

5 & 
- o 


O 

© 

sz 


2 t 

2 o 
Q- © 


Cl 

co 

© 

c 

© 

■g 

3 

CT 

T) 

© 

Q. 

© 

O 

o 

ra 


c 2 

o « 
« Ec 
© © 

© 2 
is O 

© > 
© 


CD -q 


■n '• u 
C £ 

ra © 

^ © © 
5 o c 

LL £ _J 


o>_ _ 

C C g 

=5 © 

c c 

3 © 

o 

© — 

■O c 

> .2 

O .to 

SE 

*0 ro 

3 2 

p CO 
5 T3 
c 

.© © 

© T3 

CD © 

#•5 

I ^ 

Z 03 


O 
CD 
O 
c 
03 
3 
C/3 
If) 
C “ 

o o 

■o CD 
0 C 
C/3 .E 
03 

JD CD 


3 £ 
p ra 


jc © 

O CL 

2 © 
5 © 

© 2 

2E 

.11 
ro © 
© © 
E 0 

CL o 

E T3 

O © 
O ^C 
© .© 

E 5 

© rs 

<f> Q. 


o 

ro 

a. 

E 

© 

c 

© 

E 

c 

o 

k_ 

> 

c 

UJ 

c 

0 

E 

0 

0 

co o 

0 

o — 
co O 

ts 

© 


CL 
© 
> £ 

m o 

0 -t— 

2 o 

© © 

2 tr 


< 

O 

UJ 

o 

4-^ 

C 

0 

O = 

it: 0 
c 0 
0)0 

O) O 







© 



© 

0 

© 


0 

CLfZ 



E 


. 

c 

0 

0 

O) 

c 

0 

© 

C/) 

0 

0 

0 


w 

0 

as 

*o 

O 

1 

tr 

0 

1 — 

0 

c 

0 

£ 

03 

tr 

k_ 

C/3 

‘l. 

© 

O 

"O 

C 

© 


0 

O 

© 


O 

' 4 —* 

■0 

0 


O 

, . 


C/3 

3 

O 

0 

0 

i— 

0 

.t: 

0 

GO 

Q. 

.Q 

O 

C 

C 

0 

O 

O 



0 

O 


5-43 











& 
05 = 

E -Q 

|'g 

o ©- 
£ © 
S 0) 
CC 


E 

c: 

co 

d 

_i 

CO 

o 

d 

cc 2 

LLI -I 
LL CD 


<0 

4^ o 
< a - 
CD C 
O O 
C = 
CO CO 

O 05 

Is 

CO 


< 

O 

LU 

o 

c 

CO „ 
o ed¬ 
it: C/5 
C C/5 
05 © 

d o 


c 

o 

o 


in 

LU 

_l 

CD 

< 


Q. 

C 

o 

'© 

c 

CO 

Q. 

X 

LLI 

05 

C 

05 

E 

a. 

2 . 

'co 

CD 


CD 

E 


E 

co 

CD 

O 

i— 

0. 

CD 


c 

o 

2 

c 

o 

(0 

O) 


0 

£ 

C 

o 

(/> 

o 


■D 

c 

03 


c/> 

0 

u_ 

3 

0 

0 


<0 m br 


0 

CD 


0 0 
E E 

•- CD 
»- C 

£1 

1 M 

c £ 
3 05 

O £ 

© § 
•f E 

E 05 

C E 


O 

E 

5 

w 

co 

o 

■g 

> 

E 

C 


E co £ 


05 

E 

CD 

05 

E 

co 

c 

CD 


05 >5 

O CD 
CO 0) 5 
05 E ™ 

« o? 

O £ d 

c .2 c 

.2 m 05 

e 2 © 

.© £ e 


05 ^ 
E c 

o ° 

E C/5 

O O 
f .or 
2 c 
£ o 
< E 
co 


•5 ° s - - E S N 


E 

e 

o 

CD 


E.i ? 


1- 

O 05 

5 % 
CO 

co o 
CD ~ 

£ © 
F CD 
O <]5 
Z E 


o £ 

E 
o 

c 
co 
> 

05 
05 


e 

0) 

CD 

c 

■*—> 

sz 

CD 


:e E c 

5-§£ 

" (D 3 

£ o 2 

o « s 

*05 CO CD 

e p -2 

S * 8 

in .2 -f 
*- co © 
—- CD .2, 

CD t; Q. 

— o 

CO 2 CD 

i*i 

O CD 2 
v_ ^ 05 
Q- C k “ 
a 3 w 
co cd .tr 


^ C_5 

> 05 
o 2 
a. .2 
ee 
co © 
c co 

05 -© 

2 CD 
-O >> 

CD O 
CO Q. 

3 I 

05 05 
O -Q 
2 2? 

5 E 

05 © 
N W 

S“ 


3 

O 

£ 

-4-^ 

CD 

05 

O 

O 

e 

e 

CD 

N 


CD b 
CD 5 

Is . 


"O *o 
“ c 

3 


0 . 
t- C CO 

O -L-i 


E -§ -2 
cd 2 p 

8 <3 0. 
^ c 


05 


© 

E 

© 


© 

© 2 
E © 


© S = 


o 

e 

o 

© 

W 

« 

CD 


E CD 

c .E 3 

(0 _ i: 

E E CD 

o 5 § 

^■s 


© 

CD 05 

£ © 

© © 


05 

.c 

c 

o 

Q 


vyj 

5- c © 
-° = cd 
^ E £ o 

o o?t 


o 

o 

5 

© 

w 

o 

■c 

o 

tr 

© 

© 

© 

■O 

© 


CD 

O 

o 

x: 

'O' 

CM 


o' ° 

§ 05 

-2 
o © 

.u © 

-C X3 

.2>s 
*“ o 
c o 
.2 5 

He 

O © 

° © £ 
O M 
c: 

05 o 
O O 

o 


c © 
— £ 

2 =* 

-Q X3 


•y = „ -o 


< 2 


© 


© 


© 


05 

o 


© 

-C 

"T c 

T3 o 
© £ 

!•§ 
Q. ts 

Q-p 

© fc 

© © 
W Q. 


W X3 

E ® 

• — 4-4 

© © 


N O 


O 


o o 


© 


© X3 £ X3 


O 

jc © t; 

o £ 05 

® § s 

« O Q 

o o 2 s 

© £ .c 
© T3 B 
CL O C 
= O © 
<51 


^ jQ 
> 

0 *D 


3 

0 

0 

O 

C 

0 

i— 

0 

0 

O 

< 


0 

N 

~k_ 

O 

£ 

3 

0 

C 

0 


0 
O 

c 
0 
-Q 

L_ 

3 

>S.^ 

-Q -O 


CD 
C 

3 

■o 
E 

_ _ 0 
d o £ 

O 0 0) 
CD -g 0 

O) — 
3 0 >% 
O 


0 


0 


5 ^ 
o 32 

t 3 
3 O 
CD ^ 


0 

0 

0 

0 

k— 

O 

E 


o 
o 

c 

8 o 
© 2 
£ j° 

c "O 
— © 
« N 

© '5 
« £ 
Q. O 
^ © 

° C 
© © 

1^ 

© © 
w > 

o 2 

■C ^ 
o © 

tC © 
© X5 

w 

© "O 

■o 3 
= o 
< 5 


£ © © 
3 C’g) 
§ £ o 
5 ® o 

© ^5 

o^-o 
© © N 
> - O 


© © -O 
X3 — © 
0 O > 
O o 
— © £ 
■DOC 
© © © 
© XZ 

c © © 


"O © 
C £ 

« r- 

■o 


O S 

If 

Is 

TJ > 
© > 

E 


© © 
05 ” 

o E 
o '« 
!q 


> © 
e -o 

d "F 


•F - -Q 


X 

© 

5 

o 


« o 
O T5 
"" © F 

O « 

_ 05T3 
O £ £ 

m 3 2 

r~ — 5 

si 

© o 
-2. © 
£5 

£ 2 

8 


d 

o 

l _ 

05 


© E 
O © 
© © 


£ © 


2 £ 


"O 
c 
© 

05 ‘ 

C 

E 

E <-> 
© © > 
-C O ' 
C E 

§ 

o o CO 

£ L5 > 
£82 


0 

© '-‘"O 
> ® = 
o -Cl < 

~ 2 
5 2 

i 05 

5 o 
E .2 

© co 
E ~0 

_ © 

© N 


© 


O x- 

§§ 

© 2 


73 5 
© o 
n 2 

o © 

E -© 
d © 
© 


© 35 -C 
E c O 
© E 


O d 

a. © 

II 

£ >, 


■o © 

8 © 
© £ 
a. w 

© ® 
e E 
© 

2 © 

15 

5 *- 
w 

5 © 

•zl -4—< 


o 

© c 

£ .2 

’■4—4 

©8 
E £ 
© W 
= C 

© o 

© ° 
c 
o 


© ^ 
.E © 

05-0 
E o 
o c 
© 

© CL 

~ © 
© > 
© - 

c © 
o .E 


© 


05 


© 


r T3 „ 

CD © -Cl 

©Jr 

Q E w 


© 

E E 


© 
> 
o 
a. P 

S’ © 

© V. 


W O 
— © 

o '■6 

E ' 
05 


W © 

"5 o 
^ 2 

© o 
3= 5 


c c 
© E 
o o 
O E 

E ~0 
c © 
© > 
o 

e‘ E 

■o © 
© 

©“ £ 

g-I 

E 

W ■£ 
. © 
© © 
N © 

'© O 


5 2 

© o 
c o 

© ^ 

£ 2 
_ 05 

,E o 

- .2 

C E 

P ^ 

© N 

o o 
© o 
o.£ 

© © 
£ © 
© E 

M 1_ 

© 

E © 

© £ 
© © 
© £ 

£ 2 
© o 
*- 2 
£ © 

E O 
2 © 
£ 5 
1 2 

8 = 
E E 


© 


© 

E 

© 

V— 

3 

0 

C 

0 


0 


O >, 

* a5 

■a 


c 

0 O 

§5° 

CD ■>- 

■§ r 

.2, © 

© 8 
E E 
o © 

w jr 
E £ 

I 5 

o © 

© -g 
0 3 
-Q 0 


0 

k_ 

O 

0^- 

m c 

8-2 

© S 

o £ 
3 £ 

05 

d 


< 

O 

LU 

o 

c 

© _ 
o cr 

£ w 

c 2 

052 

d o 


c © 
O E 
© £ 

II 


yj — - 
o 2 © © 

2 >»o 
m ■© w 

5-E X- 

© © o 


o 

© 

E 

E 


m © 

© © 

© O 

V E 
C o 

'-= E r - 
© © 
d © 

£ © 

© -o 

o © 

O £ 


£ © 

si 

os 

= c 


© 


© 


o 

E o 


4-4 4-4 f » 

© © E 

=6 2 ® 


"D 

C 

0 

0 

£ 

o 

k— 

3 

-Q 


| 8 

© c 
£ © 
c £ 

© c 
E © 
C E 
© O 


c « 
o >- 
•*= © 
© E 

.2>E 

•F O 


r-- 

m 

o. 

CD 


5-44 










o> = 

C a 

1 £ 

o Q- 
2 w 
2 © 
cc 


© 

C o 
<.d 
© C 
O O 
C -x= 

ro co 

O 05 

c 1 

05- 

in 


c 

o 

o 


in 

HI 

_j 

CD 

< 


c 

o 

’« 

c 

co 

CL 

X 

HI 

0 ) 

c 

0 ) 

Q. 

0 . 

CO 

CO 

CO 

x: 


CD 

■C 


E 

co 

cn 

o 

k_ 

a. 

cn 

c 


c 

o 

00 

cn 


co © 3 
c j= ° 

i=a 


o C C/3 

<- GO ^ 


O CD © 


±= 3 


~ XT 


C TO 
© C 
_ © 
CO 
CD 

2 CO 


■c cn 

C7> •— 


CD 


O 

3 


CD 


0 

C -O 


03 

03 


o 

<: 

c 

o 


CD ^ 
JZ 

0 


.b > 

w o 
CD 03 
"O 
c 

03 
£ 


3 

— 4-4 

O 
3 


cn.2 
c o 
O £ 

CO 3 
_ w 
05 

c cn 
o ' 
c > 

05 


05 

o CD 
2 ~ 
c ■*- 


0 >n.S£ 


O) 

c 


0 


0 

c 

o 

o 

0 

xr 


c 
0 
o 

0 .5, 

0 HJ 

'o 00 
tr . 
o c 
o 


o Oj 

w 4—> 


o 

o 

T3 

CD 

> 

O 

E 


3 o 

o cn 

x 5 

= O 

co — 


■a > 

CD > 
.2 C 
o .2 
£ 2 

CD C 

x: o 
— o 

o .E 

c -o 
o c 
c ffl 
'q. cn 

° ar 


c 

® SK 
CO 

E 5 

O cn 


w m 

CD 2 

cn 

o .2 

8 ? 


E © 


© £ 
£ 5 

"D (D 
© © 

£ ° 
2 o 
2 

a. co 
E _ 
“ o 

0 Q. 
-Q 0 


-C £ 
O) 

c 
la 

k_ 

3 
0 
b 


O 

c 

0 


*o 

0 

N 


X3 E 
§2 


CO 

CD 


= "O 


CD 


cn 05 t 

- 05 C 


o 

o 

$ 


CO ti .2 


>, 

CO 


o 

3 

2 ^ 
2 c 
w 8 


r= cn 2 ■=? 


cn 


co 


co 
co © 
CD 


tr 

o 


CD 

_ w 
g >0 
.2 tr 

2 ° 

c *— 

CD — 

o 

C CD 
CO 05 

i_ k_ 

m CO 

> •<= 

g o 


© a 

> *o 

0 C 
Q.* 
as 


^ o 

3 x: 

i 5 

E | 

2 GO 
05 

O C 

a. 2 


^ o 

05 

.2 2 
8 o 

o r 

~ cn 

■M — 

O 05 

o o 
£ o 
5 E> 


c = 


o 

x: 


o 

5 

c 

o 

o 

3 

0 

C 

o 

o 

0 

.c 


> 

03 


0 

E 

k_ 

0 


0 

_Q 

2 «o 
o 0 ) 
S o 

•*—> ‘*s 
« ® 
S ■o 

■“ © 
05 = 

cn ® 
Cl 
CD 


T3 

CD 

> 

O 


c 
5 
o 
~o 
9 - ^ 


^ m "O 


O CO 

cn 


CD 


c O 


o 

-e _ 

2 TO 

t ~ 
® X3 
<f> >- 
® CO 

cl 

'E cn 


i-i. 

Q_ _C0 

© - 

>> cn 

r= CO 
2 05 

k_ 
0 

TO © 
CD ©» 

w co 
=> O 
© « 


V) 

o 

c 

o 

X5 


O 


k- -3 
© ® 
£ © 
o -C 


■O ~ 

© o 


CO 


- > O 

© 

> 
o 
E 
o 


05 


cn 


© o 
■C o 

■*— L_ 

GO 

■O C 

2 o 

© o 


o 

o 

© 

•* o 
§ ra 
5 5 

< 2 


c c ~ 

^-v ■♦T' 


>> 0 


o 

c 

0 

I « 


® © 
- IS 

o 
tr 
o 


cn.© 

C 05 

> O 

o o 


2= E S 


© 
c 
o 

W 05 

© © 

^ X5 

k. I 
© ■© 

£5 
© = 

C SI 

■as t 

<£ O 


XD 

p 

O 

o 


cn 

■o 

© 

o 

k_ 

0 

0 

0 

O 

O 

0 

■o 

0 

> 

O 

Q. 

Q. 

0 


0 

■*—> -*—» 

2 

5 C 
^ 0 

0 o 
0 . 
*^= c 

;> o 

o 

© 2 
05^, 

.2 o 
5 E 

1 ° 

7.9 

go 

•g^ 
© 


o 2 © 


^ w © 
- © k 
go© 


O 2 
it o 

© ^ 
c “ 
© O 
>> r- 
^ O 
W •■£= 
© O 

cn o 
o 
tr 
o 


TD 

© 

■g 

> 

o 


m © 
© X5 

© "O 


Q. ^ 


C 

© 

>> 


— *— f 


2 © 
© 

o © 


© < 
X5 ^ 

T3 

3 jn 
o © 
5 £ 

cn © 

§1 


© 

•o 

cn 

© 

E 

© 

© 


t3 c 
>. 2 & 
9 © § 


3 _ 

0 -Q 0 


.2 ^ 


~ ’ JC 

• *~T m 4-^ 

cn 
© 
cn 

O 

tr 

CD " u 2 


© © 

© 1 
O I 
X T- 
© 

4-4 
0 


* § 

© o 

JZ 0 

4-4 k_ 

o 3 

>. O- 

£ © 
© >- 

•o -5 

8 S 

m" © 

2 3 

0 


0 


|o 
0 
a) 0 

o = 
0 o 
-Q 


O Q-fi 


© $| 
©♦so 
,«n 3 

03 05^: 

x o id 

|2 § 

S XJ o 


C © 
® Q. 

E © 

. o 
o5 cn 
© ® 
© 

sz © 
o cn 

c o 
© tr 
h= 2 


■Q 

0 

O 

0 

Q. 

0 

C 


2 1 

1« 
o CO 
5 .a 


© © © 
X SZ X3 

4-4 4-4 

>- O 

© © 3 

isi 

3 © s 
o o> ~ 

T3 cn > 

§ § © 

2 

© o 
-O C © 
c © — 
3 © © 
O © © 

k— T5 
05 O 

2 2 ° 
*3 -o tr 

"O ® © 
© © 
.ic: o © 

k. ® T—1 

© Q. O 
Q. M © 
.© .2 2 = 
© ® 
1“S 

111 


© © 
© © 

3 o 

c tr 

E o 
E — 

m © 


© 

© 

o 

o 

© 

•O 

c 

© 

© 

> 

o 

E 

© 


= E 


o 
c 
« 

© 
o 

■O 

© o 

XT 3 
~ O 

- g 

• 4-4 

c 0 

^ 0 

0 o 

0 o 

§ i 

© N 

11 
o 2 
rr 0 

4-4 

> > 2 © 


® © 
— 00 

>>xr x 

c © © 


© 

k_ 

O 

© “- 

CD- 

8.2 

§§5 
O •— 

4-4 

1 ^ 

05 

in 


o 

© 

Q. 

E 


c <0 
o >- 

•x= © 

ro x 

.£> E 


in "O 
CD ^ 

^ o 
Z o 


5-45 










s* 

c» = 
.E -Q 
o| 

c ° 
o CL 
2 W 
S 0) 
cc 


TJ 

c 

CO 

d 

—I 

co 

o 

d 

tr 

LU 


co 


o 

—I 

CO 

o 

■D 

c 

CO 

O 

<r 

LU 

LL 


33 

c 

CO 

d 

_l 

CO 

o 

d 

cc 2 

ID _J 
LL CO 


© 


03 C 
O O 
C :c= 
CO CO 
O O) 


c * 

03 ■ 

CO 


< 

O 

LU 

o 

c 

co _ 
o cr- 

it: c/3 

c 2 
03 JO 

d o 


c 

CO 

.C 


< 

O 

LU 

o 

C 

03 

O 


M 

Q3 03 ® 

JiO 


< 

o 

LU 

o 

c 

CO _ 
o C3 

it: c/3 

C 2 
03 JO 

d o 


c 

o 

o 


in 

LU 

_i 

CO 

< 

I- 


a. 

c 

o 

'</> 

c 

co 

a 

x 

ID 

03 

_C 

03 

a 

a 

.2. 

•5* 

CD 

£ 

k. 

o 

z 

03 


E 

co 

t_ 

03 

o 


03 

c 


c 

o 

<3 

CO 

03 


co 

03 


5 £ 
„ 0 

£ © 
© £ 
> i_ 

O £ 
o CO 
- © 

Cl 05 

'5- o 
c © 

gS 

gS 

03 CD 

r— h— 

o 2 

° 2 

ft © 

S E 

JD 
© 


© o 
m ° 

■o -o' 

3 .2 

i 5 

w - 


.2> > 
c o 
© E 
o © 

E i 


© 


© 

TD 

© 

x: 

■*—> 

> 4= .W 

> CO 7^ 


tr 2 

© o 

© 3 
© >- 
-O 


■O 

© 

CL 

CL 

© 

O 

© 

>N 

© 

E 

© 

© ■ 
SI 

o © 
2 § 
03 

o E 
w © 

= o 

© O 
03 © 
.> £ 


C/3 O 


SI 


C T3 
© 

£ 2 . 
O 0 
GO £ 


c 

o 

T3 

a) 

L_ 

o 

4-< 

C/3 

03 

c 

'© 

X> 


© 


as 
© © 
O X3 


2 

O 

o 

5 

* 

0 

2 

03 

-C 

CD 

0 

'o 

tr 

o 

tr 

$i 

ii 

8 § 

s i 
© 
o 
c 
© 
© 

-Q 

*0 
0 ) 
o 

3 
•O 

c 
o 
o 

0 
-Q 


0 

Q_ 

(/> 
o ® 

ft C .© 

G— r\ 

© •= CO 
E X3 § 
£ -o Cl 
2 * © 
co .£ .c 
© . - 
_ <r © 
2 r? © 
Z U © 

o UJ p 

,® O 2 

-Q Q) Q_ 

13 .C 


O 

c 


c 


8 ® 
.2 2 


•o 

o 

o 


o E r- 

® CO c 
■0 0-0 
C O 7 
© ffl 


c 
o 

3 

E 

L_ 

o 


0 ’v 


c 
o 

0 

"5 
0 
c 
o 
o 

© 'to « 
o © E 

© c 
xr o c 

:oo 

° g>o 
© .2 © 
> -o © 

2 fc © 

CL © £ 

<6 o 


2 o ® 
E 2 w 

OpO 

^82 
g tr 
— © 
o w 
© © 
■o“o 
.© i ® 
d © — 
SO 


^ c 
o 
0 


0 
c 
o 
"■*—* 
0 
k— 

o 


o o 

ll 

© O 

© g 
> *- 
© © 


>* w 
c © 
i= ro o 


■X o 


|© 
g -2 

0 o 


0 o 
£ c 
0 

£ © 
© X 
© © 

© "O 
© 
3 
C 


■o©iH03£.t;c 

r~ r ^3 r- _ r~ »— 


0 0 
E ® 

2 o 
"O w 
© ft 

1 

Bi 

3 E 
© E 
0 o 

-Q O 


0 
sz 

0 
0 
> 

'■m 0 

0 O 3 

0 S *0 
“ wr 
x — 
© © 
w _ O 

© T3 ••£= 
"O © 3 
3 0 © 
0.2 « 
C. 

° 8 ° 
© ° c 
S®o 
© 2 ■*; 
C _ © 

o 

0 .E 
© N "O 

2 2 8 
>. © ® 
C CL © 

© o © 

H- © “- 

Ssl 

O o © 
© © -o 

|S § 

■o © 
- © © 
® -O o 
CL © © 
3 © Q. 

.E c © 


> 3 

> O 

cc § 

2 ‘ D 
2 ° 
2 £ 
o © 
o E 
O © 

© ic 
n: 

■*—* 

k_ >3 
© = 
■O 


11 - 
^ © © 
-O “-Q- 

2 2 cc 

O 3 «5 
O o 2 

O o o 
© > © 
£ .« •- 

°>m ~ 

C CD > 

^ o 8 

f: Z 3 
2 - © 


O 

© 

© 

© 

© 

CO 


-O 

c 

© 

CO 


■C cc 
© © < 
*= g - 
HS« 

© ~ m 

Q. g Z 

2 © 03 


© 

5-© 
© © 
-c 3 

© "2 

II 
- © 
2 E 

o Q 
g Q 
© X 

■© ® 
co 2 

-C O) 

tr c 

2 © 
Z 3 


C\J 

CL 

CD 


3 3 
O Ol 


V/ V 

o 5 
© ■*- 
P © 


O) © 

9 g 
Cl *-> , 
•=^ © ^ 
cl © 

© — 2 
.* .2 -o 

JO “ 

c 


2 © ® 


o 

N 


o Q 

2 c g 

® ^ © 
£ © -t; 


ra 

w .2 

S © 
^2 


CD 

03 m 
C © 

2 ° 
3 CL 
■O O 
r> q. 
© 

© © 
3 ^ 
OT i_ 

© O 
3 

cr © 

c .2 
.c _i 
o • 
© < 

© ® 
E ~ 

© o 
« ° 


c 

o 

© 

© 

© 

c 

o 

CJ 

c 

© 

-O 

•O 

© 

© 

« 

T3 

c 

© 


c 

o 


© 


JC 

tr 

o 

z 

—r © 


© 


O) 

c ^ 

I? 
s| 
© © 
£ Q- 

E 
o 
o 
c 
o 

CL 
3 


a o 

8 & 

c © 

•C tJ 

5 2 

xr “ 

O) 


2 © 
© © 


© 


= O = ■£ 2 ,2 


© c 


« 03 m 

■o' - ' 


® O - 
£ ~ © 
© T3 

UJ L_ —5 

rsj ^ 
O 
C 


C 0 
3 E 
c 


© 
p 

o 

> _ 
© o 


3 
03 © 
2 © 
© 

© 
o © 


> -p .2 
■ 2 .® 2 
© — 


O C/3 £ 
— tr, 


E -E 5 

•| i | 

c ® 5 
© £ < 


3 © 

2 -o 

3 C 
O © 

^ C 
. 2,2 
ro © 

CD 3 

3— 

£ © 

I § 

Z o 


21 
c w 

2 f 

© £ 
03 o 

© X 
^ 05 
03 C 

© 

W © 

1 £ 
W CL 
CL © 
O © 

' L 

0 

0 c 
0 

3 ^ 
© 2 

g © 

fc © 


© 


03 

IE 
< = 
o 

r~ © 


■It O 
C 


X 0 ^ 

0 /Tt 


c 

.2 f © 

c 2 8 
® £ -o 
E — c 
Q. © O 

■3 © ° 

|Ql 

— o 

© © g 
©or 

2 £ ® 
© ft .0 
o 0 5 

-Q o x: 


® ■£ 


w 

03 CL 

c ffl 

•i= © 

c o 
c © 

CL - 

E 03 


£ O) 
T3 £ 
© 03 
© © 
w © 


E . o 

2 ^ © 
® ft ® 

© c © 

. © w 

II 

I! 

*= © 

g O 

p g 


80 S 

5 4= © 
o“> 
© o ^ 
£Og 


0 


o 


0 c 
d) .E 
0 w 

I O 
I * 

o 0 ^ 

© ® 
o CD 


S o 


.2 -Q 0 

® © o 
w © 


.2 © 
© Q- 

■© -/—* © 
S. o •= 
2 - © c 

0 H— /13 

© ft 2 
o 2 o 
© .2 cl 


o 

o 


© 

0 

>3 

■O 

0 

0 

L_ 

0 

0 

> 

0 


C 

0 

0 

0 


0 

C 

0 

Q. 

3 

■o 

0 

k_ 

0 

0 

0 

c 

o 

E 

u. 

0 

| -6 
E 0 
3 0 
0 0 


0 

k. 

o 

0 

m c 

82 
8 « 
2 f 
c i 

O) 

d 


< 

o 

LU 

o 


c 

® ^ 
o O' 

it= w 
c © 

03 © 

d o 


< 

O 

LU 

o 

c 

© 

.2 — 
t= w 
c © 

03 jo 

d O 


< 

o 

LU 

o 

■4-^ 

C 

0 ^ 
(J ^ 

it= 0 
c 0 
0)0 

CO O 


“O 

0 

0 

© 8 . 

£ o 


© c 


© « 2 


o 

© 

CL 

E 


§ 1 


© 


w 


£ ® ® w 
O) - •— 

o -E “ - 

z E 

£ -o 
~ © 
g © 


8 2 

LU CL 


t ffl 

® E 
d © 

>, E 

c E 
© o 


03 


2 

© © 

£ © 

© © 

® 5 

° t: 

>3 0 

^ 0 | 
■-= ~o '_a 
0 0 0 

,® o s 
2 £ 1 

CL © o 


■o 

^ ® 

E © 

ffl 

^ _ L_ 

© © 
^ ♦- 
o o 

3 © 
© O 
v >— 

o Q- 
o ® 

5c 
£ 2 

© 8 


® © 
£ > 


© 

© 

© 


w 

© 


.c 

I- 


o cc £ 
2 o 

© T3 
C ffl 

- £ 

© 2 
•o O 

« © 

© JZ 
tr — 

CO o 

1 ? .2 
tr 
o 

CL 


© 


o 
© 
CL 
© © 
£ w 
© Z 

CL 

CL o 

© x 
£ 2 
*5 
-o ro 
■o -c 

w ® 
© .2 
o .-t: 

3— L_ 

o o 


0 

0 

0 ^ 
£ SZ 

71 o 
o !c 

2.5 
■if 
^ © 

1 > 
c 

.1 E 

o © 

5 § 
© © 
c .;= 
o © 
O CL 


© 

0 

© 

J3 

3 

W O 

>» c 
o © 
2 © 
0 c 
© £ 

03 . 

c CD 

I 0 

® xr 
•o X 
© o 

i£ « 

c © 
© © 
£ © 


© 

p 

o 

m £ 

^ 8 

o <-> 

5 « 

m © 

d o. 

© £ 
CL 

© 2 
© © 
g -> 
© 0 

X3 = 


C 

© 

l | 

© o 
£ o 
o 2 
0 CL 
0 "O 
O 0 

0 0 


0 

C 

o 

0 

0 

0 

0 


C <0 

s © 

ro X3 

® E 
ii z 


r^. 

m t 3 

|1 


C30 

in 

CL 

CD 


03 

in 

Q. 

CD 


o 

10 

CL 

CO 


5-46 













& 
o> = 
c 

og 
c o 
o 

S CD 

X 


CD 

C o 
<.d 
CD C 
O O 
C :— 

co co 
o o> 

c 1 
os* 

CO 


•O 

c 

CO 

d 

_l 

CO 

o 

d 

cc 2 

UJ _l 

u. m 


< 

O 

UJ 

o 


c 

© ^ 
g 03 

£ w 
c w 
os © 

CO O 


o 

_l 

CO 

o 

T3 

c 

CO 

O 

CC 

UJ 

X 


O 

UJ 

o 


5 c 


CO 


05 = 
O — 


s §>« 

_J W O 


to 

c 

CO 

d 

—I 

CO 

o 

d 

cc ^ 

UJ _l 
LL CD 


< 

O 

UJ 

O 


J 8 = 

£ o — 
w ^ co 
8 §)« 
J'5iO 


to 

c 

CO 

d 

_J 

CO 

o 

d 

cc ^ 

UJ -I 
LL CD 


o 

UJ 

o 

il 

-C o 

. _ 

© Z 

a? os£ 
_j © O 


co 

CO 


c 

o 

o 


to 

LU 

_J 

CD 

< 


C 

o 

co 

c 

CO 

Q. 

X 

UJ 

CD 

C 

0 ) 

a 

a. 

co 

'co 

CD 

JC 


CD 


E 

CO 

w 

CT) 

O 


O) 

c 


c 

o 

ro 

o> 


CO 

CD 


XL 
CO 
CL 
CO 
O « 

■to c .52 

® i CO 
E -q > 

2 ^x 
2 * © 
CO £ XL 
CO . *"1 

2 n w 
— O © 

O LU O 
o o o 

b CD 

p£ § 

CD 


CD 


co 


I *—• 

2^3 
3 3 © 
O CO C 
SCO 

£ 2 if 
© « « 
o © E 

CD C 

£ o c 

r o § 

° ®>'o 


, u .5 CD 
> n co 


co 


w fc ® 

CL CD £ 
CL > _ 

< O O 


c ©_ 
c cd m 

•I s #.- 

TD S O »- 

C := 2 O 

8 m • ® 
to o.-g £ 

C O — 

CO .©. ® 

CO Z ■ 

E ° H 

5. ® £ E 
“■ >> = » 

£ O c 
5 § o 

© £ CO 

.2 o - 

"(D 0 ) 

cd .£ n 
£ O LL 

O L. /i. 

MIL ® 

? CD £ 

C £ O 

°m® 

L (0 O 

CD £ c 
3 £ CD 
W ® S 
w !; .52 

— O X 
o ® CD 
^ ®T3 
© o ® 
o z c 
O ©s 

CL-O C 
X 3 O 
CD O O 


ffl 

$ O 

.2 o 

CD © 
fc 3 

Z E 

° O 
© 

= co 
CO o 

CD O 
> CD 

8 ° 

>.2 
C 3 
CO O 
cd 5 

-X — 
CO CO 

E £ 

2 g 
to p 


£ *- o 


1 o 

cd 2 
o> c 
CD 

O E 

C_ 

2 £ 

1 o 

g o 


(D 
CO £ 

> © 

© 8 £ 
£ E jo 
cd £ co 

— CO .C 

P X — 
•- © p 
c £ o 
CD T3 ••= 
3 CD u 
3 0 0 

q. 2 £ 
i- c ~ 
° O o 
® ° c 
5 ® o 
co £ l- 

C _ p 

o j? .2 
co .E rtz 
(C N -q 

2 2 © 
>co t 
c a© 
CO O co 
CD *- 
. 1 H. a) 

■O > 
O ro 
co "o 
O § 

E^S 
0-0 0 
Q. O CD 
p O Q. 
£ c co 


•g 
o 

^ p 

5 2 

2 co 
o o 

O 3 
CO 
CO 

— CD 

CO E 
co 

o c 
o 2 

-t— 

o co 

■o ^ 
o 

£ 
o 


o 


2 o 

co‘ 
o 

2 "co p 

S 5 
p co 

-C _l 
O CO 


o 


CO 


o C 

CO 'o 
E N 

P c 


5 CO 

> Q 
co 

o 

J3 
CO 


CD 

E 

o 


© O 

— CO 

2 "5 
>. o 

CD c 

£ .52 

3 


p CO CD 

® CO 2 

s,® ^ 

CD O O 


w 

o 

c 

c 

05 

cc 


•O 

c 

CD 


c 

o 

o 
C P 


a) 


0 
Q_ 

CD 
CD 

£ CD 


JD £ 


Vi/ ^ 

E if < 


Q 

Q 

X 

o 


o 
o 

E o 

o o 


co 

k_ 

® ^ ■ 
C -fj CT CO 


o 

05 

CO 


CO 


c 

o 

CO 

c 

CD 


o *- 
co c 

3 CD 

•O E 
3 o 

I e 
p Z 
p c 
CD § 

C © 

o > 
Z X 


co 


o 

■ XL p 
£ o. 
ffl c 
© £ 

© © 
C O) 
© © p 
O ■“ "O 

Q-£ O) 
© 3 E 
N 03 

•I © 03 

E 2 I 

o X £ 


CO 
© 
b 
© 
a. 
co 

CO 

® 2 
c 

O V_ 

o o 
© 3 
Q- P 

o s 

3 © 
•O XL 
C *- 

o x 

if © 

81 

• 1.2 
CD E 

j= 2 

o © 

z o 


co 


c 

E Z •- = 

2 o -a 

O-Z .c 

i|© 

■O £ 

3 © p 

o 

5 © 

Z, ® 

CD ‘cD 

m © E 

£ CD © 
t o. 


in 3 
£2 
CD 2 


© 

g 

CL 


© © 
jQ 

© "O 
© 


3 

CO 


o © 
P ® 

J3 O 

P 2 

— .Q 


CO 


0 ) © 
n: > 


© *- 
© © 
w .t; 

3) 
w © 
o -= 
© c 

fi 

o -o 

© £ 
•P © 

■a to 

03 s 

c © 


© 

© 

1.1 
E o 
E S 
P TS 


CD CD 

1 § 
o ° 

2.0 
TO C 
O O 

I P 

P 'F 


0 


© 


© £ 
3 if 

W © 

p E 

il 

c © 
o n: 


- ?? 2 © 


© o 

$ II 

c E 


O £ 
o © 


Z P 
P XL 
>- < 

© ® 

o. £ 

£2 
o © 

| = 
> Q 


> ^ 
03 o 
8© 

£ © 
© 

c o- 

o E 




© <? 

© > 
CD > 
© O 

©I 

CD »- 
0 0 

2 & 

© i- 

© 

3 C 

© z 

o i= 
© > 
J3 5 
© 


o o 

© 

© ^ 

> ® 
£ £ 
3 £ 
w © 
~ r: 

3 g 3 

-a £ 

§ © 
S 0 
c 


2 8 
© g 

8 ,p 
0 
> co 

p si 

if € 

© 2 

© z 

c . 

*- £ 
© >< 
£ © 
o £ 
© E 

©2 
5 o 
£ 2 
0 © 


CD — 

c . 

'L= W 

w © 
© •*= 
c > 

© © 


TO 

© 

o 

c 


© 


- -o 


© © 

82 


E 

o 


3 

O _ 

5 *o 

ag, 


_CD 
0 
3 
P 

T3 CD © 

2^5= 
>, tr © 

n o > 

- — -O.Z P 

— o ~ n: 


© o 
o 2 

TO 


O 


o 

3 TO 
£ © 

© X) 

§2 

o © 

cob — 


> >> a> 

P •£ c 

o > 3 

oo§, 
© © — 


■C ~ 

•*-' c 

C P 

Z p 

c © 


O -F - ?52 


3 £ 
■O © 


C © « 


© 


© © 


> © c. ^ 

s .-tr ® 3 •— © 
© 


- © © 
• 1 — r~ 
CD Q.Z 
© © C 


O 
3 
£ °> 

c 2 

o 5 

o < 


. ro £ 

E > 

© © 


.x. w 
© *_ 
CD O 


£ 3) 
i TO 
CD .© 


© ffl •£ 
© JC c 
© -^ © 
© o 2 


> 

CO © 

o © 

2£ 

c > 


0 c 

0.2 

— <m 

o 


o ~o 


c 

§ p . 
^ © & 

c o 0 
o o 


3 

_co 

E .E b 0 


0 

o 

ffl 

m c 
2 2 

g 2> 

1 ^ 
05 

CO 


< 

O 

UJ 

o 

c 

p —^ 

O PT 
£ w 
c © 

05 £ 

W O 


< 

o 

LU 

o 


c 

© ^ 
2 = 
£ w 
c © 

05 © 

W O 


< 

o 

LU 

o 

c 

© ^ 
2 “ 
£ w 
c © 

05 £ 

w o 


< 

o 

LU 

O 

C 

0 — 
O = 

it: 0 

C 0 
0)0 

OD O 


o 

0 0 
‘o£ 

* z 

■n © 


0 
0 c 
O 


o 

0 

CL 

E 


© 
>>£ 
© 


O 


© 

' © 
> 
TO 
© 


© 

> 

2 

1 


2 © 
© ^ 
£ © 
© £ 
.2 § 


-5 


£ e 2 w 


JC c 

11 

©f 

m E 


f I 
£ ± 
— 0) 
.2 CL 


■Q 

0 

0 

O 

CL 

O 


CD 

C 

o 

0 

0 

3) 

© 


CL 
© ■= 
W o 
o © 

0-3 


Q-2 
ffl 2 

£ i 


o 

CO 

o 

o 
© o 
£ w 
— x 

© 2 
© ^ 

□ I 

m be 

8 2 
CL O 

2 o 
clO 


w 

X 


© 

© 

k_ 

0 

0 

0 


CD 

C 

3 

*o 

"O 

0 


0 
u. 

o 
0 
JD 
0 
C 

u. 

o 

^ j2 cd 


■D 

0 

Q. 

3 

0 O 


c o w 
2 0 u 


-O X 
C 1- 
0 CO 


0 ^ 
© ffl O 

5 ©- if 
© £ 
£ JO 
3 © 

w n: 


0 


0 


0 

-C 


0 

I? 
© © 
cd q5 
£ 3 

r ®> - 

o 2 © 
Z 2d- 
5 "o © 

O Ml 
° © ^ 
O 3) 05 
Z 3-E 

° | © 
O.Q c 


>, 

33 

TO 

© 

O 

© 

ffl 

© 

33 

P 

3 

O 

iic 

0 O 
c '-* 1 - 

a 8 

TO C 

E O 
© o 


2 o 

O 5 

© "O 
2 .© 
Itz 

2 c 
^ © 
C\J TO 

li 

O 

0 0 
Q_ 

® % 

£ o 

3 O 

w g 


£ o 

0 3.®. 

in ffl o 

0 Q„ 
Q_ 0 
^ ^ 0 
2 *9 .c 
t . 0 

0 •'S >. 

© © - 0 
© J TO 
£ © © 
>c o 
Pm© 
(j o 3 


T3 N P 
.2 £ © 
Q. If) 33 

O TO >* 


° c C 

O ffl E 


© 


c « 

O I- 
— © 
© 33 

,2> E 

- 3 


CD 

X 

CO 


C\J 

CD 

X 

CD 


CO 

co 

X 

CD 


X 

< 


5-47 















& 
o> = 
E n> 

I c 

o R 
£ © 
IT 


o 

—I 

CO 

O 

TO 

c 

CO 

O 

cc 

HI 

LL 


X 3 

C 

CO 

d 

_1 

CO 

o 

O 

CC 2 
LU -I 
LL CD 


to 

c 

CO 

d 

_l 

CO 

o 

d 

cc s 

LU -I 
LL CD 



TO 

0 

c 

—I 

0 

CO 

0 

d 

_i 

TO 

CO 

c 

0 

0 

0 

d 

oc 

00 ^ 

LU 

LU -J 

LL 

LL CD 

< 

< 

O 

O 

LU 

LU 

O 

O 


ffl 

C o 
<^- 
© c 
o o 

c *3 
03 CO 

o o> 

P 

CO 


< 

o 

LU 

o 


5 c _ 

E 8 = 

o? C W 
8 &2 
_J w O 


< 

O 

LU 

o 

Sis 

g o — 
w ^ w 

8 03 « 
-J C /3 O 


< 

o 

LU 

o 


® © 
£ ° 


c 

05 


CO 
F to 
§>£ 
'</> O 


c ^ 
05 = 
o — 

w | (!) 
8 0)2 
• w O 


o © = 

£ O - 
B) 

8 o>« 
jfflO 


c 

o 

o 


in 

LU 

_1 

CD 

< 

£ 


o 

03 

O 

L_ 

CL 

C 

o 

CO 

c 

CO 

Q. 

X 

LU 

0 

c 

0) 

a 

CL 

.<0 

‘ca 

CD 

XT 

*-> 

_ 

o 

z 

© 


E 

<0 

k. 

O) 

o 


03 

c 


c 

o 

L» 

CO 

03 


co 

03 


5 

o 

© 

>> 

c 

© 

CO 

© 

§ 

© 

3 

g 

'> 

X3 

c 


O © 

■2 E 

o © 
o Q. 

£ p 

w .E 

§2 
O 3 
® O 

•2 % 
© -2- 
S3 © 
© “ 
© SI 

° "% 
© o 

CLZ 

C /3 

CO £ 

XI o 
o 

XJ O 
© ~~ 3 
b -o 

3 C 
TO © 
c 
o 
o 


© 
af 
I i 

o>;V 

c < 
CD 


0 

-C 

c 

o 

CO 

o 

© 

Q. 

E 

p © 

11 

<0 — 
© -o 

3 = 
© © 
© O 
© O 

E ^ 

& o 

§ 3 

11 
0 i5 
0 . 

11 
— 0 
0 ^ 

0 c 
c *— 
0 © 
CD 0 


—■* r- 0 

to £ .tx 5 


© 


© © 

£ © 
— c 

3 © 
O 03 

£2 

© 'Z. 
2 c 
£ ® 
r £ 

c ® 
© Q. 
© E 


© .E 


Q.g 

© 3 

M g 
© 5 
'o © 
© © 
a. CD 
w 

© £ 
£ © 
© 2 
E 

^ © 
0 

© id 
© © 
£ sz 
3 © 
O X3 

5 ra 


© « 
m h- 


— c 
o 

Q.J 
2 2 

2 o 
0 O 
CD '♦t 

2 a. 
O) © 
© © 
w x: 

T1 © 


'w' - 

— -I 0 


O 0 

© s 
© — 
’© o 
CD c 
x: £ 

t 3 

o o 


© 

> 

b 

£ © 

1? 

£ © 

« p 
~ CL 

c x: 

© 03 

II 

S-f 
© © 
.© © 


© © „ 

£ « ■$< 
^ © 
Coe 

■© © 2 
© £ £ 
o © c 

|r E 

© © 

O J3 

a El 
© 

X3 

]g 

3 
O 


© 

2 o 
o © 
x: cl 
O) o 

3 


C .E 
© 

© > 

O o 
1- © 


© — 1 
© Q 

© — 
o © 
© ^ 
X 3 — 


3 2 

© © 

E 

| 9 

© © 
£ £ 
3 g> 

§ l 

o © 


c 
© 
. E 
■p x: 
© © 
© ~ 
W X3 
2 © 
_ Q. W 

5^2 

© © 2 

S c © 
© © £ 
-c a>. 
^ ~ o 
© — *- 
5 -o § 
o © o 

^ "© 
•O 


© 


3 .E 

■o o 

© 3 

x: P 
© 

O o 


« 


© 

c 

3 

a 

© 

© 

c 

o 

■O 

o 

03 


W 


c 
o 

Es 

© 5 
E 
E 


■o 
© 

£ 3 © 
< W OT 


© 

£ © 
03 

c 2 

© 03 
W © 
© « 
a. g 

« 3 

© | 
© 5 

o ©. 
© © 

Q-CD 

« 

© £ 
£ 5 
© Z 

| ^ 
32 

© 5 
© © 

£ - c 
3 © 
© S 
§ © 

. 2 , '5 

© © 

m -5 


x: 

c 

o 


§ ® 

Q. W 
© 

© c 
x: © 

m E 
© CL 

© 3 
© CT 
3 © 

O © 
c ^ 

© 
© 
3 
© 
O 
© 
£ -a 

- w 
© ® 
© 3 

© P 

—I © 

9 f 
® ° 
£ 2 

g 3 © 
o © 
■s -d 


_ t © 


O) 

c 

tl 

0 CD 


3 

O 


0 

c 
0 

Re 

3 ' ■ 


— n 


© © 
© c 

>- © 


g 

3 
O 

^ a © 


o 

3 

■o 

c 

o 

o 

© 

X3 

g 

3 

O 

5 


© 

© 

© © i= 


-*-• 0 
o J5 
c « 
O -e 

l! 

© o 
o © 
O « 
c 

xj 

c .S 3 
© > 
« > 


© £ 

£ E 
© - 

© © 

© E • 

xi ^ p 
^.©2 
c 5 2 
© © a. 

2 © E 

2 © o 

a- © ° 

Sr 2- © 
^ 

w ^ E 

© o E 

p~r 2 

| £ c 

© © 8 
i- X 3 ^ 
© 3 © 
© ° '^ 


o 

TO © C 
© £ © 
_© © 0- 
o r n 
O O 9 

© <- Q 
W C -i- 
© © - 1 - 
_ > W 
P © ©r 

© © c 


■*- a 5 


51 


© 

E 

© 


© 

© © c 
£ x o 

o 't— © 
2 •© © 
E s w 


3 

— • © 
° 2 © 

© £ 

£ | 
o c — 

oc: 

© O § 

£ X | 

©©d 
© ~c~ 
o ri 2- 
b g 5 .! 
p « g 

3 => 3 

o © o 
§ co 5 
0^—0 
'© © ’© 
CD c CD 
x ~ x 

R I o 


X) 

0 

£ c 
© o 

IS 

Re 

CD 0 
c JO 

88 

I” 

.E © 

70 ® 

> 

0 «J 
X) © 

ll 5 

3 o a: 
E ® 


3 © 
O XI 

o — 
O c 

>>£ 
© n 

E 5 

Q. © 
© © 
© xs 

E 8 

8 c 
R 3.2 

5 3 


CO 


0 

c 

o 05 

o © 


© 


< 
c 

X 3 
© 
© 

TO — 
© © 
O 2 

£ o 3 
2 0 2 
5 © © 
8 £ E 


CD 0 
C > 

= ir 
■o o 
0 
sz 


e2 

o g 

1 3 

£ 5 

2 p 


© 

cl -E 
© o 


c 

o 


c 
© 

© © 2 
'S’ © TO 

m © ^ 

XX © o 
tr x= 
o " 

O’ c 


CL 

Q. 

© 


© 

L_ 

O 

© 

CD J 


8 .2 

I © 

S .g 1 

z i 

03 

d 


< 

o 

LU 

o 


c 

© 

2 = 
£ © 

c 2 
03 © 

CO O 


< 

O 

LU 

o 

c 

© —~ 
0 = 
£ w 
c 2 

d o 


< 

o 

LU 

o 

c 

© — 
2 = 
£ © 
c © 

03 © 

d O 


< 

a 

LU 

o 


c 

© 

2 = 
£ © 

c 2 
03 ra 

d O 


< 

O 

LU 

o 

c 

© — 
2 — 
£ © 

c 2 
03 © 

d o 


© c o 

2 © o 

Ql © CL 
? » £ 2 


o 

© 

CL 


© 


o 

© 

Q. 

E 


u. o 

25 

© 8 

© | 
© Lq 

U 


o © 

w © 

© C 
© 1 - 


© 


© - ~ 
CD 8 d 


© 


© cc 
03 E 

c £ 
O O 
ro O 


P r- ~ 
d § P 
w .2 c 
go© 

9- 2 © 
St® 
CL 2 O 
dog. 
£00 


0 

0 

O 

i_ 

O 

P 

3 

O 

<: 

0 

L_ 

0 

0 


0 51 C£ 

Z- >2 n\ 


C 

j- C 2 
f* ^ £ 

b OT © 

£ © O 
■pc© 
2 3 © 

-8 ~ 
ca w c 


© 

x: 

c 

03 

o 


© 

© in 


© .E 
do© 

S -8 .2 

2 o g 

3 ^R 
w < © 


3 
Q « 
W ^ 
© £ 
C ■“ 

O < 

Rg 

CD Lj 

<92 


© 

> 

o 

E 

© 

L_ 

>T . 

0 0 
E c 
c © 
.2 CL 
b © 

I! 

O P 
O £ 


w 
© 
o 

li 

II 
© © 
© s 

fo © 
_j -e 

D £ 
— -Q 

d 2 

i— « 


c 

L_ 

© 

3 

O 

© 

© 


03 


© 

c 
In 

1 ^ 

©2 

© in 


3 

Q 


w 

© 

c 

o 

'E 


o 

L_ 

o 
0 
0 
c 

'CD 

.2» 03 O 

5<22 


© 

> 

o 

E 

© 

L_ 

>3 . 
0 0 
E c 
c © 
.2 Q- 
b © 

I! 

O P 
O £ 


o 

si 

82 
Q. C 

E 2 


0 

n 

o 

0 

0 


0 


0 

n 

— TO 
© 3 

-E o 
o 

o 


Q. 0 
CD CD 

S © 

« I 

C TO 


£ O .S 3 © o 


L_ 

0 0 
© c 

E © 
x c 
P —i 


E 

L_ 

© 

E 

w 

© 

t: 

p 

© 

Q) 

0 

c 

0 

> 

ir 

0 

_c 

> 

be 

CL 
© 
k_ 

p 

k. 

CL 

0 

■o 

0 

0 

c 

© 

■> 

TO 

0 

3 

L_ 

0 

TO 

© 

w 

0 

L— 

X3 
© 
k_ 

j 

_l 

CD 

© 

W 

O 

C 

3 

C 

O 

O 

P 

3 

O 

O 

O 

P 

© 

XI 

CL 

O 

O 

O 

C 

O 

O 

O 

O 

1- 

Q. 

0 


X3 TO 

■c © 
> 
P 
© 
CL 


gcD 
© © 
W £ 

o o 

--4-^ 

SZ 0 

5 I 
8 2 

< E 


E 

© o 

S3 £ 
o 03 

tr ~£ 
© Z'sx 
« © 3 

© 3*. W 
T3 = © 

c © b 

O © d 
w CL d 
O © © 
© © C 

Q- x: _ 
E w .E 

E o 
■ o © 

O S3 .E 
£ 0370 

co Lq £ 


03 

c 

*L_ 

3 

"O 

0 

o 

c 

0 

-Q 

k. 

3 

0 

'td 

i§ 

© r- 

© O 

I L. 

d £ 
.2 c 
p p 
c o 


0 ir 
■zz 0 


in 

0 sz 

CO 

co 

E 

CL 

CL 

■■= 3 

CD 

CD 

^ z 

z 

Z 


CD 

co 

CL 

CD 


I s - 

CD 

CL 

CD 


00 

CO 

a. 

CD 


5-48 














Mitigation Monitoring Program for the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project 


Ji' 
cn = 
£ jo 

1 c 

o §- 
£ CD 
S 0) 
OC 


P 

c 

CO 

d 

_J 

co 

o 

d 

0 C 2 
LU _l 
LL CD 


o 

_l 

CO 

o 

p 

p 

CO 

O 

a: 


0) 

C o 

<n 

a> c 
o o 

P *3 
CO CO 
O 03 
L— V-> 

£2 

d 


< 

O 

UJ 

O 


« c§ = 

-C CJ — 

C ^ 

a) cd£ 
—i w O 


< 

O 

UJ 

o 

c o _ 

2 8 = 
~ £ 0 
« F <0 

3 §>£ 

_J CO O 


CD 

£ 

k_ 

CD 

<d 

co x= 

CO -a 


co 

O) 


CD 

P 


0 o 

c o 

CD ^3 

o c/) 

f- o 
E o 
o 2= 
o 

2 d 

3 o 
o co 
§ co 

> CD 
CO CO 

'co 03 

“ c 


P 

c 

03 CO 

1 .5 2 

® fflQ 
o o (D 
•5= ^ p 
CO P — 

®oW 

O) o > 

CD ~ s > 
> ®IL 
JO 


CD 

p 


CO T3 

£ 3 ~ 
O O f= 

2 I § 

p o 0 
"5 c c 
o CO o 

>05 

m ° 

—• C 

S-B 

5 = 

t_ >- 

o 


co 

p 

c 

CD 

E 

E 

o 

o 

CD 


co 

SZ P 
■c CD 

o 2 

Z sz> 


CO 

c 

- o 

C u r 

o 2 ~ 

co Zr > 
0 U- 5 

<D . CD 

co a> o 

CD C O 
£ ^ 2 
8 £Q o 

2 ® 8 

P £ 0 


in 

<• 

CL 

CO 


P 

0 

0 

CO 

CD 

1 _ 

3 

CO 

CO 

CD 

E 

o 

o 

"co 

CD 


CD 

P 

O 

0 

03 

cd 

CD 

CO 


CD 


CD 
LU 
a 5 
o < 

*8 

£ co 


c 

o 

o 

3 

to 

c 

o 

o 

CD 

-C 


o CO 'C 


CD 

£ 

O 

in 

CM 

C 


P 

c 

CO 


o s; 


£ S3 

£ CD 

03 c 

o Z 
o o 
p 0 

> 5 
c o 
O 03 

. P 
CO o 
§ CO 
O JO 
t P 

is 

co 5 


CO 

g 

o 

k_ 

3 

n 

CD 

c 

>> 

a. 

3 

o 

o 

o 

CO 


0 

*c 

CL 

o 

v_ 

CL 

CL 

0 

o 

0 

0 

'o 

0 

CL 

0 

0 


.tr 0 3 

o 

E 

32 

3 

o 
<: 

'0 
CD 

-C 

tr 
o 


0 ±5 
— 20 
5 0 0 
o o 

^ ^ 0 

P 9 m 


0 

co g 

C CO 
CD -S 

CJ 

CO CO 

E c 
a> — 
= O 

CO LL 
03 Q 

•s ° 

£ CD 
"CO £ 

O P 

■= 0 
CO > 

0 2 
*= o. 
tr a. 
co co 


CO 

c "to 
82 
CD 03 
03 CO 

8 o 

CO >» 

E £ 

® 3 

H g 

CO ® 
03 C 

2 o 

"> P 

o ® 
CO 

c 
o 


c 

E 

V_ 

_ 0 
0 0 
o ^ 


Is 

o £ 
g c 
CO 0 

"co £ 

CD o 

r- C® 

€ E 

2 CD 
co-g 
« E 

3 = £ 
® E 
f o 

O o 


>< c co 

-Q — cO 

■o »_ 2 

§3 « 

E 3 m 

■— o •*-' 


® « 


jd 

X3 C 


03 

O 


03 

CO 

q. 2-2 

_ Q. O 

« <D 2 

15£ 

0 

03^ O 
B = co 

CO CD 

o -o 

£ U) 

> 

_ £ £ 

t d) -Q £00 


E^3 
p co co 


CD "O 
~ CO 

o 


X3 

P 

3 

O 

g 

"co 


CO 

CD 

c 

CD 

JD 


C g> 

u 03 ~ 

2 E =£ 


c 

o 

co 

CO 

0 

CO 


0 

0 




0 
2 -o 

03£ 

c 3 

0 o 

2 0 

O N 
O = 
■O 3 

5 co 

=r £ 

0 0 
C i: 
o w 


3 

0 

0 

0 

E 

o> 

c 

g 

o 


g 0 03 

o a.E 

03 o 

C -o E 
> 0 • 

§ 2 ^« 
l_ k— 


0 

C 

o 

o 

0 

k_ 

o 

0 

n 

0 

0 


S 7:3 
a) 

. 9 ? 0 

CL 

SB 

o 8 

-b 0 
0 X5 

8 p 
0 
x: 


>* 

o 

c 

0 

CL 

3 

O 

o 

o 

c 

0 

> 

0 


0 
o £ 

g| 
o ^ 


3 

_Q 


0 O 
C 

o 
0 
0 
0 
C 


> 

o 

c 

0 


§2 
g co 

_ ® 
~ 0 -5 

>3 


CD 2 £ 0 5 0 £ 


o o 


c 

jr 


5 £ 
2 8 


£ o 
0 

0 

O JC 


£ 0 

II 

0 a. 


c 03 -- d ■= 


3 0 

JZ> £ 
C 

o c 
0 ~ 
3 03 

S.B 

i g 


o 2 

0 

0 ~a 


0 

0 


s si 


c 
0 

2 £ 
0 0 
c 
0 
o 


•8 2 3 


Q 8 


■o g — 

£££ 
00 

log S 

OT O <M •£ 
£ £ O 
■2 >»£ § 
o -Q £ C 

=> -a f £ 
o 
3 
0 

.-0 0 
JD c 
0 O 
o 


0 

> 

o 

o 

0 


5 83 


o 

-o 2 

0 0 

II 

3 2 

O Q. 


to £ 

c 8 
O £ 
o x> 
0 c 

ol 8 


1 p 
Q- -p 
3 3 
O O 
O 

O >% 
C 0 

3 g 


£.18 


o 
03 
C 

o 
o 

3 

c. 

"S 3 

c 

o 

o . 

£| 

£ o 

8 - 

11 

> 8 

58 

X >. 
0 J3 


O 

0 

3= 

0 

0 


0 

N 

E 

"p 

E 

o 

TO 

£ 

0 

0 

p 


o = 

0 

3 

■g 
> 

p 


o to — 


= o ~ 


0 0 
> L. 

■5 O 

0 £ 
g 
o 


0 


o 

0 

03 

P 

0 

L_ 

0 

E 

o 

p 

0 


- g 

0 * O 
g CD 

0 2 
fc £ 

3 Q. 
8 CD 
0 

o 2 
£ 3 
tr o 
< g 


p 

0 

0 

> 

0 

o 

X 

0 

g 

2 

v_ 

3 

X3 

0 ) 

w_ 

o 

-Q 


■D 

0 

o c /3 

8 o 
0 o 

8 ^ 

•° 0 

£ § 

8 ® 

g o 


03 

0 c 

c g 
o o 

-8 

80 

o £ 

0 5 
0 0 
£ 

> 03 

2 c 

CL 03 • 

TO CO TD 

— 8 CD 

3 O 03 
O _ 0 

g o E 
0 0 0 
co 2 "? 
m o 5 
0 o 

tr in 

O CD 


3 

-O 


.OCD 
O m .> 

0 £ 7 ; 
<28 


0 

h_ 

o 

0 

CD J 


0 o 
o ~ 

8 -B 5 

1 i 

03 

d 


< 

O 

UJ 

O 

p 

0 —■ 
o = 
£ 0 
p 0 

03 £ 

d o 


< 

o 

LU 

o 

p 

0 

o = 
£ 0 
p 0 

03 £ 

d o 


0 

p 

0 


0 

a. o 


03 
O P 


o 

0 

CL 

E 


00 ^ 

CO 0 £ 

2 g 
o 


t £ 
0 — 

0 0 
0 


p 

0 

0 

g 

0 

JO 


<• 

o 

CD 

00 


JO 
0 
sz 
TO 

T 1 C § 

CO £ =6 

0 0 o 

P CL O 

p -p g 


0 £ 
p n 
O CO 

0 f-Z 

O £ 

>>co 
■*- CM 
TO o 
0 £ 

0 o 


X3 

0 £ 

<8 

O 


■D P 
CT 8 


-=5 O 


o 

CO 

in 

o 

o 

o 

in 


C\l 


O O 

CD CD 
tJ- CD 

O O 


3 

w sZ) 

o cm £ £ £ 2 0 


£ w 
0 0 
0 0 

TO P 
O O 
^ P 

o 0 

"c E 

i § 

^ "o 


3 

o 

O o 
a) ^ 
5 = x: 
03 o 

is 
8 £ 


— (f) 
03 

1 § 

o £ 
■p o 
03 O 
0 § 
tr 0 
0 p 
0 —; 

8 CQ 

£ 8 

0 H 

03 

2 « 

— 0 
0 0 


O p £ 0 


0 

0 p 

,-p p 

p o -o 
0 Z C 
P $ 0 

1 9 ® 

03^! P 

p 0 

I2| 

2 °r 

3 o 00 
p 0 1_ 
m a. 0 

p TO 

0 E £ 

loo 
0 £ £ 


0 0 
P % 
0 2 

‘3 
V) 

C/3 
(D 
O 

k_ 

O 
TD 
3 
O 

£ 

2 

0 


Q o 

= p 


E 

o 

*■—> 

CO 

!5 

co 

Ip 

O) CD 
C 

g £ 
2 o 

00 

CM 


P 

0 

0 

£ t 3 

o2 
e 0 

< p 


0 


0 

g 

o 

03 

p 

g 

o 


CL 

O 0 _ 
P ZZ 3 
< < P 


P « 

o >- 

-J= 0 

0 P 

®» E 
•— 3 


CT3 

CO 

0 . 

CD 


o 

a. 

CD 

z 


5-49 












ov-= 
5 .0 

1 c 

O O- 
£ w 

2 05 

CC 


co 


C /5 
CO 
co 
© 
o 
c 
/••r © 

X ©5 
—j CO 
W ™ ^ 

o ©5 

- £ to 
Oo“ 

It, g 
UJ C - 
LL © 


© 

c 


m 


C /5 
CO 

© 

© 
o 
c 

o' © 

P CD 
—I m 
CO ™ 

o © © 

- £ cn 
Oo“ 
oc -o 8 

UJ C “ 
LL © 


© 

c 


co 
© 
cn 
© 
o 
c 

O* © 

CJ O) 

—I © 

CO ™ 

O © © 


CD 


of 

E? 

LL © 


CO 

CO 

© 

CJ 

© 

c 


© 

XC o 
<*• 

© c 
© o 

C — 
© © 
O O) 
*tz ^ 

'&5 

CO 


< 

O 

UJ 

o 

11 = 
£ o — 

2 *Q co 
05 05 © 

-J OT O 


< 

o 

LLI 

o 

g s = 

co O © 
8 ©>£ 
_J 55 O 


< 

o 

UJ 

o 

c 

© = 
o — 

© ^ CO 
8 05 ® 

_J 55 O 


c 

© 

■C 


© 


c 

o 

o 


in 

LU 

_l 

CD 

< 

I- 


o 

©^ 

O 

k. 

O. 

C 

o 

co 

c 

© 

Q. 

X 

111 

© 

_c 

© 

a 

CL 

•S. 

'©" 

£□ 

■C 

— 

k_ 

o 

z 

© 

■C 


E 

© 

w 

05 

o 


05 

c 


c 

o 

o 

© 

05 


© 


05 


CD "o 


© 

05 


© 

-C 


■O 

c 

05 © 

o £ 2 
® © m 

■2l ® 
© ■© — 
aS § co' 

05 Q > 

© 'r > 

> © LL 

© 
x: 


© 

x: 


05 

n 

o 


>v _ 

j© x: 


C T S - - 


•— /T< -O © 


Vi/-— —i VU 

TS P 2 © — 


_ X 5 
© -a 

n _ 


c /5 c 

c o 
8 o 
© d 
a 5 cn 

Q- o 
E © 

8 — 

!2 c 
o o 
o © 
> © 
> 05 

©_ cn 

'© 05 

CD c 
x: d 
■c © 
o £ 

Z X 5 


9 E 

L S O 
05 «— 
T 3 P C /5 

o 5 o 
^^ © 
c c 
m-2 ® 

# 5 1 
z2 8 

Z C 05 
- O V. 
C O r 
O © £ 
C /5 £ '> 
© > 
© 

© a> 

05 © 

C ' 

■§ CQ o 

2 ® o 
.a £ ro 


© m 

r- ”3 

j t—< 

© o 


© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

CO 

O 


© £ 


© 


© 

O 

c 

© 

•O 


•c 
sz o 
— LL 

o 

© . 

© CO 

05 ^ 

© CE 

CO < — 


© a; 
£ < 


_ © 
x: sz 

3 o 
© c 

c /5 © 

35 

o ° 
u o 

© 5 

XI _ 

3 .o' 
O Q. 

© 2 
o o 

2.1 

.i O 
C 0 

E 0 
0 o 

CD O 
C *•“ 
O CD 
C 

o * 


o 


c 

o 

© 

c /5 

c 

© 

a. 

E 

o 


o 

© 

c ^ _ 
.2 Q iS 
o O !5 
•2 © « 
J= x: 
c 
o 
o 


o 

o 

x: 

05 

o 

o 

.c © 

«r~. * 

~ a> 
c a. 

«I 
2 8 
CL-n 


tr 

o 


© ■=; 


i -o 
c 
© 


© 

co 

o 

■c 

o 

■c 

© 

cn 

© 

o 

>. 

X 3 


cn © 
© 5 

Q. © 

co CD 


© 


. c 
c o 
o © 

CO © 
CO © 

a> © 

© 05 
05 c 
.2 T 3 
X 5 © 
© © 

£ 5 

-Q CD 
© £ 


© 

o 

C 

© 

■O 

1— 

o 

o 

o 

© 


t: 

o 


© 
_ cn 
© c 

•X 5 © 
c Q. 

S E 

2 ° 

q. o 


"O i: 

© . 

$ co 

© § 

8 u - 
© © 
c £ 

« >v 

•tr X3 >v 

° -o ‘S 
C © g 

CD > i- 

E 2 © 

>v Q.— 
© Q. O 
Q. © C 


© Z ® 
>♦— 
03 
0 
C 


■O 
0 
k_ 
0 
> 
o 
. o 


a 
sz 

a) 0 

©5 

w 

ra © 


c 

_ o 

05 a 

c c 
c o 

Z5 ’X= 

-a © 

& 

© 


■o 
© 
o 
o 
•O 
c 

05 O 

o 


© 

© 

CO 

d 

U- 

a 

o 

© 

"O 

c 

© 


. o 
= cn 

® o 
1-2 ra 


5 ~ 
© 


© 

Q. 

E 


CD 

© 
*z 

© 

J© CO 

2 u - 

_ > © 
Q, =■ -C 
05 05 


■o -2 
o S 

5 « 
© 


m © 

LL) Q) 

a> o 
£ 2 
o © 


© 2 .i= 


O HI i- .2 


c c 
co o .2 .2 

"ZZ' ^ 1 •*—- 


^ © 
o © 
~7 -DZ. 


O CJ 

o o 
— 1— 

CO 0 ? 

c c 
o o 
o o 


Q. *f= 
P 

si 

* g 

ra 2 
© k. 

CO CL 


E © © 

0 C 
LO c 

^ ® 

Q. O - 
CQ Q. O 

cS^ 

© ~ E 

cn E w 
= C 2 
W tX 

© E *- 
o o « 

CO ^ © 

®oc 

IIS 

1^ 
© 


■O 

8 CD 

8 ® 
co £ 
(/) . 
® co 

IS 

O QJ 

c £ 

© >v 

E •© 
=fo 

§.§ 

■© 2 
05 Q_ 
3 Q_ 

2 ro 

£ o 


© 2 £ .2 
“ © © 
© 


■c 

© 

cn 

© 

■o 

>. 

XJ 

■O 

© 

© 

> 

o 

o 

>. 

TD 

© 

© 

i_ 

© 

o 

c 

cn 

© 

© 


o 

o 

05 £ 

2 1 

P © T_ Z 


£ © 
c a. 
© © 

2 8 

© ^ 


© 
E 
E 

§ 
© 


05 ^ 


E Z 
© 


z O 
1_‘ © 
±= © tJ 
© t: q. 

m © c 
© LL .2 


X 2 © 

© T- 

x: © 
■O C 

C o 

II 

! 
& o 

£ 2 

2 8 
o ra 

leg 


vw r- 

- E 
© 8 
o © 

qS 

o 
0 0 
SZ CD 

ii 

© £ 


© 


o 
o 
_ 5 

© © 
© "ST 

©CD 

— o 
© 2 
sz 

© 5 

g ^ 

cn ^ 
« 

© © 
•O -g 
3 £ 

5 © 
.2. "o 


. c 
c o 
O © 
w © . 
© © © 
© © C 
© 05^ 
05 c i 
C "o CD 

*0 © 05 

© © :C 

© £ "^ 
^ O) 
-° © c 
© £ £ 
£ 05 a 

©•CO 
*= 3 -^= 
0"O0 
© ^.05 
.2 s 05 
8 ® 

nL © > 
CD © k. 

© ° £ 
^ © © 
— Co 

o .2 2 

C C °- 

.2 .2 £ 
—3 

o © o 
3 3 > 

© © © 
c c -Z 
o o © 
o o CD 


£ © 
•> © 
§ CO 
© 

C d 

© ll 
•O O 

o o 
o 


o 


© 


0 

c -D 

■g « 

I 3 

^ CD 

o © 
o 


E 

© 

. i 

CD 05 

IS 

< O 
o H_ 

s « 

in © 
•cf £ 
CL O 
cq a. 
Z © 


o 


CD 


© 


© 

X 5 CO 

£ 5 

o LL 
O 

5 

05 

£ E 
© 2 
© — 
o 2 


£ -o ® 


o 

© ~ 
cn c 
— 'c 
cn •= 
© E 


c 

05 © 

£ o 

8 c 
C 0 
0 
CL 

E 
o 

o _ 

>k CD 
-Q 3 
L_ O 
0 ^ 
CD ^ 
0 


E 

>5 

0 

CL 


£ i? 2 2© 


© 


■c 
© 

© 8 
£ 73 

co" -a 

5 73 
^ 2 
© 2 
£ o 

>V O 
XJ >v 

"8 ® 

© © 

2 © 

Q. — 

a. o 
© c 

° 8 c 
~ © 2 

© © £ 


■— © 
2 "a 

c 
© 
E 
E 
o 


cn 
c 
o 
o 
© o 


a. 


© 


© O 

E ^ 
c •=> 

£ (S 

05 ^ 

I z 

© v_- 

£ © 

o c 
£ o 

© LL 


© 

E 
E 

3 

cn 

© 
x: 

c 
o 

W Jc 

® 8 
0 k_ 

CL o 

.i 1 


£ 3 o 


3 

X 2 _ 

£ a © 

Q Q 5 

0 
o 
c 
0 
c 


0 

-C 


■O 

c 

0 


0 
V_ 

O 
© 
CD J 


8.2 

© 05 
2 £ 

c 

05 

CO 


< 

O 

LU 

o 

C 

0 ^ 
O = 

it= 0 

c 2 
0)0 

( 7 ) O 


< 

o 

UJ 

O 


c 

ra — 
2 = 
2r cn 
c © 
o> © 

W O 


< 

a 

LU 

o 

■+—• 

C 

0 ^ 
O = 

it= 0 

c CD 
0)0 

a) o 


o 

0 

CL 

E 


_ © 

© £ 
cn ~ 

•8 © 

d ® 

cn m 
cn © cn 

2—3 
o k. o 
£ o 
£ — © 

i s e 

| j? 5 

.2 ©" 

© £ ro 
l— o.£ 


° P 

| ® Si 

£ £ cn 
© 0- 

£ q ^ 

^-i CO 
CJ © 

§ 2 X 5 

k_ o © 

© o > 
~ cn £ 
11 CL © 
O ^ CL 
-O — 

© © o 
o £ c 

o^S 

O CD £ 


05 

© o 

© © 
_l 

cn o 
> CO 
© CO 

Q o 


© 

XT 


© 


•O CL 
§2 

®" "O 
x: 2 

^cr 


© 

cn 

o 

c 

c c 
© o 

E B. 

£ 3 


© 


Q -o 

= © 


© 


cn 


■o 
« CL 


o 

05 
CM 

£ © 


CO © = 
3 
C 
© 

^ > 

©< 

2 as 


£ © 
E £ 


(D 

*D 

O) 

C 

b 

0 

0 




0 

P !5 id 
in 0 c 

C\J JZ 0 


cd m x: 

2 £ z 

2 •) 
8£l 

35 “ 

g|| 

_j © in 
CD c © 
© © c 
£ O o 
H- Q.O 


© 
cn o 
cn cn 

_ 2 © 

05 © x: 


oo 


i^ 

o 


O r- 

cn £ 
© 


o 

sals 

» §8 

S © x) 

E 05 £ 

2 © 3 

£ z cn 


£ © 
£ £ 

II 

0 

k- QC 
o p: 

s ® 

n £ 

© c 

o ® 
w © 
o § 

2 © 

O XJ 


o 

cd § 
co O 
CL cn 
2 © 
E 3 
21 
© £ 

© © 
> Q. 

©1 


© 


© r-: --P 


C 

o 

Q. 

3 

V_ 

75 

d 

05 

c 

d 

© 

© 

k. 

XJ 


© 

§ 

o 

© 
1 x: 


Q. 

E 00 

£ CM 


X) -O 

© cz 

£Z © 


© 

| 05 w 

be© 
3 o J 3 

W k. 

05 10 © 

x“> 

r 3 cc 

8 o 

© x: 2 

5 .9 £ 
© x: o 
x 30 


£ o 

O 05 
£ CC5 

©• "O 
- c 


© 

cn 

£ c 

« — 


2 o 


o 

© 

3 

CD 

CO 

o' 

O 

c 

o 

cd 

in 

0 

o 

o 

o 

© 

in 

CO 

o 

o 

Q. 

E 

o' 

m 


cd 

CM 

o’ 

S 

o 

cd 

cd 


©■ 

CD 


Q. 

3 


© 

E 
sz 
cn 

— cn 

© '"o 

w 2 1 
- X © £ 


© 
£ o 

X 5 TO 

© c 
^ © 


C o 

o >- 

•J= © 
© X5 

. 2 > E 

•- 3 


r-k 

o. 

CD 


CM 

hr 

CL 

CQ 


CO 

Ck 

0. 

CD 


5-50 













03 = 
E 3 

1 g 

O Q- 

.F © 

2 <D 

cc 


co 

CO 

-5 CO 

!j .2 

CD u 

,-T a) 

y 03 

— 1 co 
(/)”>. 
Ojffl 
co 

CO 
03 
O 
© 
o 


. 3 

O o 
cc -o 
hi C 

H CO 


3 

c 

CO 

d 

_1 

cd 

o 

d 

DC 2 
UJ _l 
U. CD 


O 

_i 

co 

o 

3 

c 

co 

O 

DC 

111 


© 

U 

<*’ 

CD C 
O O 
C ’1= 

co co 

O O) 

II 

d 


< 

a 

HI 

o 


£ c _ 

8 S = 

*1 So 
8 &£ 
jmO 


< 

O 

hi 

o 

= c _ 
© © = 
3 o — 

*t £ co 

© F © 

g 03 £ 

J mO 


< 

O 

HI 

o 

ll = 

£ o — 

© £ W 

8 ©>£ 

-J © O 


c 

o 

o 


CO 

HI 

-J 

CD 

< 

I- 


CL 

C 

o 

'co 

c 

CO 

a 

x 

HI 

03 

C 

© 

Q. 

CL 

CO 

'co 

DO 

3 

kk 

k_ 

o 

z 

03 

■C 


E 

co 

k_ 

03 

O 


03 

c 


c 

o 

2 

c 

o 

i? 

co 

03 


3 

O 

3 

03 

o 

o 


■e 

o 


. 


© 
03 
CL 

E 
o 
o 


CO ■= 


co 

03 


CO 
CD 

o 

w 

S’ DD 


c 

o 

CO 
CO 
2 03 


2 © 
5 © 
© w 
c d 

CO H 
-O Q 

o o 


co 


C 


S 3 

ag 

© ir 


03' 

3 T 

3 dd 

CD CD 

?£?cq 


0 


03 

.C 

♦-» 

03 

E 

3 

CO 

CO 

CO 

3 

3 

o 

5 

co 

'cO 

CD 

3 

■c 

o 


03 


■° 03 
© C 
£ O 

03 © 
3 C 
•3 O 
3 = 
3 © 
>. 03 

© S’ 


3 3 

"S © 
© 

■O 
c 
o 
o 


O) 

c 


03 

— c 

03 0 


C/D £ 

c > 

0 > *0 


O V*_ 

y /a tt 


~ 03 
3 5 

® >4 

E 3 


CD 

3 


o O 

>4 

03 13 
3 k. 
— CD 
© 3 
N O 

E © 

I £ 


CO 


03 


3 o 

g>o. 

i & 

£ o 


5 J?- © © 


co 

CO 

© « 
o © 

03 03 


CD . 
-Q CD 

2 5 

3 ' 

O 

§ _ 
03 

£ E 


£ 2 © 2 .©. 


11 

03 


13 CO 
CO _ 
SZ CO 

3 3 
3 O 
CO ••= 


> '3 
CO 
03 
O 


O y-i £ £ -3 


c 
O T3 


Q- rt 


co 
o -a 


ii* O •— •— — 3 

3" r- rr -l = 


I l 
£ 0 


.:x > -o 


■n © 


CD 


3 

-e © 
o © 
Z © 
© 

® g. 

3 E 


S 5 
£ § 

S.® 

2 g 

o CO 

Ecg 

© g 


>> 

. 5 . 

© m 

o £ © 

o © > 

>4 ^ cc 

© ° 

2 © 8 

©OO 

o ~ © 

c o° 
w <r © 

© 3 

© • ~- 
i= 3 © 
© O CO 

© O 

§ | © 
r~ C- Q 

i= 0 
^ CL-o 
O E o 

2“! 
Q © 3 
OSQ 
03 © Q 
J1 ■© X 

iij 

o w 


© 

O CD 


m2 3 © 


CL S 


© 05 


*5 O). 

DC c 

< © , 


CD ® 1 
©go 
■£ "o 5 


3 

o 

SZ 

03 

Is 

03 

4k 

3 Q. 
CD C 
© F 
2 8 


i: 

rr 

o 


co © 
o § 

2 © 
© '5T 

S’ CD 

® r 
— o 
ro Z 
1 : 

, . 
CD © 

E 5 

CO ^ 
0 

0 0 
3 is 


. 3 
c o 
o © 

CO © 
© 

CD © 
© 03 
03 C 

■E TO 
"O © 
03 © 

2 .0 

-© CD 

it 

03 -i 

^ © 
© TO 

J £ 

-J © 

m © 
co 03 

CD © 

£ g 


£ CD 

5 CD 

03 

c p 

CO H 
-O Q 

o o 

8 ® 

co £ 

c -o 

3 


O 

TO ' 4 ~ 

E © 
co 'SZ 

CD S 

^ © 

X a. 

03 


CO 


. § 
fi? 

03 o © 
3 0 H 

■2 © X. 

© H CD 
3 -o 5 
•8 ©£ 
a|© 

CD > -3 
03 03 
03 3 £ 
> '= O 

i_ 0 *— 
0 0 
0 O 


tu Q .w W 


O .s: *r 
C C 

o o 


0 

3 s! 

L2 CO 

-r-, ° "© 

TO 3 3 


“I! 

5 E 

03 2 

1 s 

CO 5 

2 ©, 

3 'co 

S§ m 

I# 

c o 

§ z 


© 

CD 03 

f m 

o ^ 
-7 -C 


o o 

D D 

0 0 
c c 
o o 
o o 


•as 

CO 4_ 

CD CL 


CO © 
0310 
L= TO 

Elf 

03 

£ 00 

O 2 
_co CE 
co < 


03 

3 

5= 3 
CO © 
CO 

3 O 
03 4 - 
Q. 3 

E ® 
o E 

© >4 
>s 03 

3 Q. 
© *03 

Sa 
2 1 

^3 © 

II 

03 £ 
>> TO 

® O 
* 5 
c — 

O >s 

a-g. 
S 2 

Q. © 

E E 
E o 


CD g 

^ TO 
H © 

03 03 
3 > 
~ O 

>4 O 
■© >4 

■o 2 

03 © 
> CD 

I! 

sg 

o co 

5 © 


0 


0 


0 

CD — 
C »- 

o o 


0 0 O 

*2 0 '-tr 
0 0 0 

cO» 

.2 £ © 

|2 E 

128 
8 q © 
■= O s 

|5 5 

g?.i 

«= © a 

©2-2 
© 5 4_ 

03 CD © 
© CD © 
© £ TO 


3 

o 

6 

TJ © 
© ~*~ 

© © 

0° 

© © 
© > 
"O © 

E © 

© 3 

1 = 

I? 
2 £ 
2 o) 
2 E 


2 co 

3 ~ 

© £ 
— © 
DL ^ 

□ I 
1 s 


0 

0 

k_ 

D 

0 

0 

0 

E 


0 
0 
o 

L_ _ 

o c — 


_ c 

o o 

Q-'-g 
^ 0 

^ O) 

a E 

<-> © 


E £ 


o 

_w 

© 

© 

© 

CD 

TO 

© 

O 


|0 © 

3 3 
O © 
o © 

_ © _ 
© k. © 


'© © 
CD 3 
3 « 

© CL 


'© 2 


O) © 
3 > 

= (X 
TO O 
© £ 


CD 


.§ O 


a a o 

o § ® 

Z o i: 


© 
t_ 

O 

© 

“ 3 

8 2 

© 8) 
O •— 

1 2 

03 

CD 


< 

o 

HI 

o 


3 

© ^ 
O = 

£ v> 
3 co 

03 £ 

d o 


< 

o 

HI 

o 


3 

© —4 

o = 
£ co 
3 © 

03 © 

d o 


< 

O 

Hi 

o 

■ 4 —' 

3 

© —4 

O = 

^ w 
3 © 

03 © 

d o 


o 

© 

CL 

E 


© 

3 

a 

'5 

© 

« 3 
o 8 
® E 

II 

iS 

|| 

m £ 

© 3 
3 © 
1 - 3 


© 


© E 
(0 
0 
-Q 


°:§ 
o> to 
c\j . 


© 


© 


© 4 ^ © 

3 ° 

C3 « 

O © 


© 
444 -5 

£ cn 

3 ° 

3 S 
CO o 
9-0 

o tf 
© © © 
o © s 

>4 © g 


<M CO 


® © 
03 3 

O O 

k-, © 


03 


© 
3 

IE 

- 0 


O CD 0 
. (O Q. 

© 2 — 


3 

3 

© 

©’ . 
« 3 
o .2 
= a 

© © 

E ^ 

3 03 
W c 

3 ■© 

a g 

© k. 

© 3 


CD £ 


3 

© 03 
W 3 
© -* 
© O) 

2o 
5 © 
£ w 

S 48 

8 o 

2 3 
5 


« 

0. 

2 O 
— © 
© CL 

fkO 

“ i 

.E o 


3 o 
3 

© CO 
- w 
O CL 

ri 2 

CO 

O © 


> © 

i'5 

w ^ 

© 3 

3 3 
£ © 

2 E 


o © £ = 


© 
> 

“ 3 CE 


3 © 
© 3 
3 O 


C\J 

CM 

W 

: Cl 


© 
> 
© 
Q 

CD © 
> £ 


Q. 

z » 2 
£ = © 

0 -© ri 
© © ‘ 3 

E © ,E 

“ sS 

°© g 
CO .TS 


o 

3 

© 

L_ 

O 

4-k O 

o o 
© 

0 - © 
© £ 
3 
o 
o 
o 

3 
O 

o 
o 


© 5 
3 E 
o 

C > 
W 3 
3 0 

3 H 


© 

© 

w 

© 

03 


-F O 


£ 3 


-F rD E m CO 3 3 


© 


O © 
0 3 3 
O E 3 

3 2 © 

£ k. S= 

3 © HI 


5 > 

3 ' ^ 

© o _ 

oom 
~ © 


© 

3 

^4 


O w 


© o 
> o 
X O 


4 - © 


3 « 

•^= © 

© 3 

.E 3 E 

■— o 


h- 

X 

CO 


in 

r- 

x 

CD 

Z 


co 

l^ 

X 

CD 


5-51 












& 
o> = 
.E -Q 
o '» 

■4—< l— 

E o 

o CL 
2 0 
2 0) 
GC 


0 

_ 0 
5 0 
J ® 
CD O 


0 

o> 

2 £- 
| g 

o 133 
° 0) 
TO o 
C 0) 

ca c 


"O 

c 

0 

d 

_J 

CO 

o 

d 

cn ^ 

UJ _J 
LL CQ 


0 

3Z o 

<£ 

0 C 

o o 

C -J3 
0 0 
O 05 

c ■ 

gi* 

CO 


< 

a 

UJ 

o 


I 0 = 

£ o — 

$ ^ 0 
8 05 2 
_J « O 


< 

o 

UJ 

o 

c 

0 „ 
O ^ 
ft: M 
c 0 

05 0 

CO O 


c 

o 

o 


m 

UJ 

_i 

CD 

< 

I- 


C 

o 

'(/) 

c 

0 

a 

x 

UJ 

0 

c 

0 

a 

o. 

0 

'to 

CQ 


E 

0 

k_ 

05 

O 


05 

c 


0 

05 


0 


0 


0 

-C 


Ok 

JO 


TO 

0 


«)tr 


c 

o 

0 

05 


^ c 

C/5 0) 

SI 

JO Q. 

oL-i 

-I 

■O o 

»-S. 
§m 
5 § to 

1*1 

c -o « 

o 0 E 

0 2 ^ 
o t; o 
0 S .2 
q -2 -js 
cui® 

•E -o ,2> 

0 $3 -£ 

I « ® 

‘I O § 
o o o 
O o = 
hOS 


0 

-C 


.2 £ 

§1 
e e 

E 0 

1 a- 

> 0 
O W 
TO 

If 

1 ? 

E >* 

— o 
0 “3 


° € — 


c 
0 
T3 

dJ^n 

r- vj 

1q 
03 


0^0 

Z © Z 

CD CD ^ 
(D 

0 w g 

0 -|2 TO 

£-5 3 

~ o § 

tSo 

^ c O 

0 


g 

o 

o 


o CO 

a) 


as 

03 

CD 

.C 

tr 

o 


(0 

>* 

£ 

3 

CO 

0 

.C 


If 

3% 

0 a3 
.2 > 
> o 

O c/5 

a. £ 

-O 2 


c 

0 

>. E 
to 0 
0 x 
0 0 

0 2 

3 


2 0 
o p 
Q- I— 


O 

g 


o 
c 
0 
0 C/5 
05 

c 
o 


= 2 

0 0 

0 Q- 

“■o 
0 o 

|2 
E LJ - 

o O 


2 & 

O 0 
a. ■*- 

- w‘ 

^ 05 

0 33 

E 0 

o i_ 

E f. 

0 Z' 

■“ 0 

1 _ TO 

o c 
.tt E 
c 0 
o 
E 

g 

3 

O 


™ -5 .52 o O 


0 0 


0 2 

00 


0 2 5 


0 


O q .2 


0 

Q. 

ll p 

a 0 

o S 


a ob 

3^0 


« 0.TO 

o $ g 

O CD 


Q_ 

2 g 

§12 
0 0 

|! 

2 o 

CD o 


g 

»1 
o > 

■o 

C 
03 

CD • 
O CO 
ir, C Q 

•C 2 =5 

O « 0 

£ 2 2 
3 0 "E 
< 0.0 


~ JD 


0 


§ 

o 

o 0 

in s: 

r- C/5 

c .E 

£ fi 
1 § 
E 2 

2 ’c/5 

§ | 
TO °- 

§2 
O « 

|2 
o 0 
C 0 

2 g 

3 

o — 
^ « 

!§ 

■ 1 ? 

8 a 

c 0 
E E 

O <d 

3 2 


0 
05 
05 

0 c 

"O 0 

0 

o — 

£ w 

o m' 

2 ■§ 

Eo 
0 T ~ 

Q. c 

0 •— — 

0 

> 0 

o § <= 
O 3 


o 
g 2 
3 


CD 0 
JO -C 


CD 

LL 

a 

o 


0 

0 


0 

05 

0 .E 
£ "D 
g. c 

TO : — 
C 0 
3 JO 
O 


c 

o 

0 

Q. 

E 

O 


0 .t: 


0 


0 

E 

3 


S: 0 0 
, 0 
o 2 - 
. 0 g 

2 TO 

ti 


D 

O 


in 
TD 
03 

2 < 
■4—» 

o • 

O TO 
0 2 
TO ~ 

0 o 
9- 1 = 
0 


» m £ 


^ c 

° o 

E 0" o 
2 CD 3 


0 o » O t 


o 

O 




CO 

« 8 


CD 
x: 

O CD 

SE 

O E 

cl 

CC5 0 

JO 


0 . 
>> 0 
0 0 
TJ J= 
O 03 

00 O 

E ^ 

j= c 

s l 
2* 
Q .2 

0 > 
CD •■£ 
CD 
O C 
O 

*0 

CD O 
££ 3 

E § 

-Q C 
3 


CO o 


CO 

CD 

i_ 

3 

CO 

CD 

CD 

E 

c 

o 

■4-^ 

0 

05 . . 
•J= 0 

El 

CO) N 

E — 

g TO 
2 8 
£ O 
0 - C 
JZ *o 
0 

4— — 

11 

2 5 

I o 

n 03 

it 

■0 g 
CD 8 

c "S 

^ O 


2 c 
i= 
SI 

3 0 
0 c 
C o 

o w 

o 2 

0 c 

8 0 

2s 

CL 0 

■*— p“ 

O 

2 "D 

c 0 

o N 

O — 
TO TO 


3 
O 

g 
0 

3-0-0 

05^J 


TO TO 
3 2 
O 0 

g 0 

2 c 
0 o 
O)'f= 

2 8 
O g 
!q 0 

| § 

II 

0 tl 

§2 

o 

0 o 

2 jo 

£ 3 
jo 0 

0 0 
^ « . 
0 0 


0 05 
^ c 
■D (D 

™ 0 

£ 8 

1 - CD 

>-2 
0 TO 

£ 2 


03 Ok 

5^3 
0 £ 2 2 

•5^00 
^ CO -b 
W 4- 0 CO 

>co 


0 .E 


c o 


0 
■O 

u. 

0 

N _ 
— C 


© 0 

il 

c _ 
0 ^ 
E 03 
0 

JO 


c 

v_ 

o 

JI 

TO 

0 


c 

0 

S 

0 

O) 

0 

c 

0 


0 

O) 

c 


5 S 


0)0 - ® 
^E 3 DC 
0 £ TO 


0 


0 


g 

o 

JO 

TO 

0 

N 

*k_ 

o 

j: 

■ 4 -— 

3 

< 


B h- 


0 


o 

c 

_ 0 
r 0 D 

C— -*— 1 L_ 

x: !q 3 
- 0 0 

• £ c: 

0 c ^ 

0 CD o 
0 2 O) 


O > 

-o 3 

c « 
o c 
o O 

2 o 

3 3 
o £= 
g » 

m o 
w o 

O) 0 


Q. 

E 

g 

3 

o 

g 

0 


0 

1“ 


•ccT 2 


0 


-j 

TO 

0 

E 

o 

a: 

TO 

0 

55 


5t2_ 
■° § 0 

_ 0 jc 

« ^ li. 
CC5 rr> 


K C ii 0 0 


CD JO 


O 0 
Q. JO 


05 .L= 


0 


0 

m C 

8 2 

8 -f 

1 ^ 
05 


cn 


< 

O 

LU 

o 


c 

0 ^ 
o — 
£ 0 
c 0 
05 0 

CO O 


< 

O 

LU 

o 


c 

0 _ 

O ^3 
£ 0 
c 0 

05 0 

d o 


o 

0 

Q. 

E 


0 

JZ 

£ .52 
0 -g 

3= 2 

0 

2 5 

£ to 

R ® 

o o 
0 g 
£ o 
_l o 

0 0 
iE 

h- CO 


CD 


.C 
^ CO 
CO CD 
8 uo 5 
003 

o n 0 
o i o 
0^,01 

c -C 2 

I? CO 

g 0 id 

82 -^ 

•= 5 £ 
° ^ ~ 

.52 ®c 

j: £ 0 


CD • 

I i 

£ f 

CO CO 
© 

Q. 33 

!•-§ 

■ 0 

o 2 


C\] 


^ 0 
0 -C 
0 O 

0 E 


0 

JO 
0 

'3 
0 
0 
0 
o 

c_ 

o 

g 
3 
o 
g 
0 

£ o 


1 9 

C C — 

g 0 0 

O 01 
f: g £ 

IS 8 

£ 1 . 
0 O ®° 

^ 8 05 
0 O [K. 

£ £ o 


0 Q. 
0 c 

O 03 
Q. | 


o 

!c o 
g r-: 

js -a ^ 
•= E 0 

£00. 

« ^ ^ 


0 


0 

TO 

3 

O 

_c 

0 

o 

0 

Q. 

E 


o 

06 >, 
CM 2 
O 0 

— -c 
o o 
06 E 


C <0 

O K. 
0 
0 JO 

.E 3 E 

= 3 


tK 

S 

CL 

CD 

Z 


00 

N- 

O. 

CD 


5-52 













3 * 

o> 


c 

5 

*k_ 

o 

"co 

p 

"p 

o 

2 

o 

Q. 

CO 

CD 


cr 


ffl 

C o 
<n 
© C 
O O 
C 'X= 
CO CO 

.g o> 

c 1 
ra¬ 
ce 


p 

o 

o 


in 

UJ 

CD 

< 


0. 

c 

o 

"co 

c 

CO 

a 

x 

UJ 

® 

c 

ra 

a 

a. 

ra 

'co 

CQ 

.C 

k_ 

O 

z 

a> 


E 

<o 

ra 

o 


ra 

c 


c 

o 

CO 

ra 


CO 

ra 


p CD 

o o 
*= c 
co co 
o = 

3 Q. 
TO P 
CD c 


CD 

> 


O 

$ 


5 £ 
o E 

P N 


— O O CD 
~ sz — ~ 
ra 

3 

o 


co = 
■tr co 


o 

CO 


~ - "P 0= S 


>. CD 

rax: 

P l- 


co 

CD 


3 

co to 

_ C CD 

p CD C 

2 o 5 

£*fE 

-- o 2 

2 P 'co 

pi 

cd ® r 
> £ o 

ra ® co 
c ra 
co ^ 

CD TO 

k_ — 

cl 3 
CD 


ra 2 


ra 
2 o 

CO -P 

cd ra 

>- o 

— 3 

co -a 

p ® 

ra c 
-ra cd 


ra co 


TO CD 
c p 
ra — 


ro £ £ • >• ° 
-k co co £ _ 


(D „ 

3 
0 
C 
0 


^ “O 


"P t— r ^ 


C 

0 

0 

0 


"D 
0 
C 

o 

0 


3 

0 

0 

0 

E 

0 

> 


P 
3 

O . 
^ 0 


0 


O 

£ 

■a 

E o 
P Q. 


£ E 
'c ip 
o .■=; 
E 5 


2 _ 
cd ra r- 
;p o £ 

< a. 5 


ra © 
2 2 
.2 "co 
m c 

< 8 


P o 

ra;p 

o « 

£ ® 
> 
ra ra 
c p 

ra £ 

CD 3 

oo 

.P CO 

L_ 

'F O 

E o 
8 E 
>> p 

co .2 

TO 

|S 

If 


0 


0 
0 
O 
0 
Q. 

0 O 

C 

-C o 

p E 

p 

II 

~ 0 

? "S 

ra -Q 


"ra 

o 

o 


CD 


p ra 


CD >, 

■p ra 
CD o 

x 2 
CD X2 


CO CO 
TO 

ra co 

CD N 

E •- 

® TO 
£> CD 

8 E 
CO o 
E ■= 

® ra 

~ 0 
-C V 

■§ £ 
8 o 

C 

£ § 
CL~ 

c ra 

o 8 

o — 

CD 

C *- 

® 3 

p CO 
CO ® 

ra £ 

— cd 

- "2 
O "3 

ra ra 


to 

c 

ra 

CD 

p 


CD X X co £ 

P O O CD O 

r: c co -ra ra 

o p ® F UJ 


£i 

3 ra 
ra o 
■> 

CD 

£ £ 

CD P 

3 « 

^ 0 

8 s co 
p 8 c 


•3 « ^ ra E 


CD 

(D 


O 

CD 

GO 

C'. 

o 

C\J 

iri 

1^ 

CO 

CL 


CO 

CD 


£ o E 


C\J 


£- p 


1>1 
| 81 

2 1 © 
2 ra 

q O 

o ~ ® 
E >• c 
= ® 

gi ® 
® § S 5 

2 cl c 
o ® ra 
SEE 


=; ra 


CD CO 

■i CD 
CO 
CD o 

g- 

>>£ 
C _ 

p ^ 

>» 
ra o 


£ Q — 

C Ql 

® ra 

- 0 
o -Q 

Sp 

t o 
o ^ 

c S 

3 0 
O ^ 

E ^ 
0 ^ 


0 

0 

-Q 

0 

'5 

0 

o 

0 

0 

0 

0 

C 


O o 

CO O 
ID 

> oi 
0 £1 
■O (I 

0 fe 1 - 
£ 

0 ) CO 
0 

JD ^ 

° 8 
0 O 
JD X 

T, ® 
3 ra 

ll 
| 1 
Ie 

CD 

ii 

° i 

o 2 
c 01 
2 c 

XI ® 

o -ra 
cl 5 


C COX w 

S.® 8 5 

o == ® ra 
p ■- -o 
® 5 •“ ^ 

£ ,- . CD 

- •£ cd -ra 
2 c P 5 o 

2 £ S 0 

2 o 8 «= 

5 I 8£ 

LX CD ^ 5 

ra .:= 2 co 

® = "ra 8 
-ra ra a) s 
>- ® -8 -ra 

CD *“ O 

q -2 ® g 
ra 3 £ 

2 2 cd 


0 


"O 0 D 

|£| 
ra o "co 

® 2 cr 
q. 2 — 
co co P 

8 'E£ 

o y-a) 

2 w .52 

3 CD ^ 


O 

® ^ 
Q.T 3 

3 

"ra 


g 
, P 


— > ^ U 

^825 

a c 

8 E 2 o 
8n,_o 

C ® CD 

« £ £ o 
° c P -n 
® 2 g 3 
5 


|o 

€.1 
c t: 
CD o 


o 

o 

CD 


£ £ 
ra 


o 

CD 

2 

"co 

CD 

P 

CD 

C 

o 

ra 

ra 

5 

o 

p 

ra 


3 

> >- 3 

> CD CO 
CO 3 v. 

*- c — 

0 3 

o ? - 

g ! ° 

CD £ CD 

co ra jd 

® -TO 
H 2 ra 
. ra § 

CO n g 

^ = TO 
V p 


fSl 

£ o _ 

5 82 

2 ~ TJ 

ra co cd 

M 0 
— Q.O 

-o -a 8 
2 c w 
Foe 

Q. ~ 

® CD 
TO W ^ 

cd ra 


T3 -rj 
CD 2 
N CO 
P N 

o — 

P TO 
3 2 

« 8 

CD *z 

£ p 
. ® 
p £ 
o 


TO CD 
CD O) 

"ra 8 
£ QC 
p "g 

i.§ 

p -j 
.2 "co 

CD 


ra 
o 

- ® 2 ^ 

a5 m P I 


Q.T0 5 £ 


P 2 ra 
n ra p 

•o o £ 
ra xx cd 

- TO £ 

O ra .2 

^ — X 3 

to ra 
2 £ 2 
ra £ m 


^ O 
' 3 

0 W 

0 .t£ 
> 0 
'0 0 
O 3 
0 O 
*“ -D 

8 ra 

ra 8 

CO P 

ra z= 
-ra co 

° >: 

p — 

5 ra 

w o 
CDS 
O TO 

2 3 

PI <: 


2 do 

3 P 

O s 

8 p 
o ^ 
S ra 

>2 

8 ® 
x -° 
ra co 
■o 

®- ra 
ra m 
ra = 
.TO h- 
O 

d ® 

. p 
CO CD 
CD CO 

o 2 

P Q. 


w TO 

c 2 
co ra 


c ® 5 


TO 

P 

ra 

p 


TO 

® ^ 
CL >- 
Q. -P 
ra cd 

i— k_ 

^ 3 

Ip 

•2 2 
® 2 
ra g 

w os 

TO CO 

P o 

N 2 
— O 


■CO 

o 2 
to -S "8 
8 £ 8 
£ -S 3 
ra U. cd 
_ CD -P 

3 £ TO 
CD — -= 

>? £ o 

CD . 


2 ra 


21 I 

co d 2 

CO CO 
P ra £ 
ra to co 


w ® - 

ra ^ c 

S>p® 
P N E 
E — 0 

2 TO CD 
E ra ca 


c 

co 


p I— p 


© 
t_ 

o 

ra 

m p 
8.2 
p ra 

8 -f 

1 ^ 
go 

c n 


o 

ra 

Q. 

E 


P o 
O >- 
x= CD 
CO P) 

. 9 >E 
£ 3 


oo 

r- to 
CL s 


m 


5-53 











5-54 









































c 

o 

o 


m 

ID 

—i 

CD 

< 


o 

a) 

o 

Q. 

c 

o 

ffl 

c 

ra 

a 

x 

ID 

a> 

c 

0 ) 

a. 

Q. 

CO 

‘ra 

CQ 


O 

Z 

ct 

■C 


£ 

ra 

w 

o> 

O 


CT) 

C 


<0 

CT) 


2* 
CT) = 

9 -O 

s'S 

1 8- 

2 CD 

tr 


CD 

ts u 

<.o 

a) c 
o o 
c *= 
ro co 

O CD 

"E ■ 

CT) • 

d 


ca 

CT) 


CD 

k_ 

o 

CT 

CD- 

8-2 

S £> 
e i 

CT) 

d 


o 

ffl 

CL 

E 


C O 

o >- 

•i= CD 
CO S3 

.E> E 

— 3 


"CT 

c 

ca 

d 

_i 

co 

o 

d 

a: ^ 

ID _l 
U_ CD 


< 

O 

LL) 

CJ 

= P ^ 

5 s = 

ffl ^ cd 
© CT) £ 
—I CD O 


CO 


— CD 

c £ 
CT SZ 
CD 
0) 

1 § 


CD -2 ffl 
£ E £ 
Cl £ .t 

ffl lo § 

£ O ffl 

c CD Q - 

o £ ® 

§ o-« 


CD 

CT 

>N 

co 

E 

"co 


5 £ t- £ 
ffl d iS 

.E ao c 


o 

ca 

c 

o 

o 

CT 

GO 

C 

o 

o 


05 

CT 
CD 
C 

o 
a 

c 
o 

o 

ffl 

CT) ffl 
ffl CD 
CT CD 
CT 
CL 

E 
o 
o 

O 

cc 

ID 


E O 


_ CD 
CM "CT 
O 
C 


c 

o 


CT 

CT - 
"CT »= 

O C 
>, CD CO 
° CD , a 


CD 
CT 
O 
CT 
a. 

CD 

•ct 

CT 

-t GO 


O CT 

o “ 

CD — 
CD CD 

CD 2 
CT CO 
C — 

ffl ffl 


0 

CT 

n 

S 

■+“* 


E 

CT 

o 

C 

c 

H— 

© 

© . . 
O -CT 

O 

P CT 

CC 

CT .t 

UJ 

E CT 

LL 

3 cr 


O CT 

CT 


CT 


CT 


O 

C 

CT 

CT 

O 

g 

•2. 

05 

CD 

CT 

■tr 

o 


Q CTS 


CT 

ffl 

4-^ 

CO 


CT CT 
Q-CT 

CO c R 

CT O 

C ffl 


CO 

E 


Q. 

O 
(3 

8 g 1 ® 


ffl CT 

0 E 


ffl 

CT 


O 

ffl O "w 

£ in Li. 


•a 

c 

0 


co 

l_ 

CD 

*o 

CD 


O 

^ CT 
ffl ffl 
© O 

> ffl 
O S= 
o ffl 


o 

CT O 
"m ffl 

£ E 
_ ffl 
ffl O 
P CT 

-2 c 
CT C 0 

ffl CT 

— .55 

c '- L 

05 ffl 

ffl E 
.2 o 
ffl •= 
S 05 

o O 


c 

8 o 

© CD 

> 

ffl P 

2 © 
i_ CL 
O 


O _ 

ffl ffl 


« 8 
CT -o 

E/ffl 
C0-£ 
F c 
05 


C 

CT 

L_ 

03 

O) 

CD 


CD 

CD 

S 3 -C 

£ct 

5 1 

T3 

CD CO 
C 

*•- o 

El 

05 CT 
CT ffl 
CT ^ 
CT 8 

CT-*- 
E O 
o 


o 


CD 


CT 

© 

V> 

ffl 

"o 

CD 

CL 

CD 

C 

° CT 

« 5 

73 a 

ca >5 

El 

.£ CQ 

CT 2 

N £ 

if 

E CT 

CT) 
Jr CO 
O C 
_ ffl 

5 E 


CD CT 

JC 2 


“ > ffl 


05 'CT 
O 05 


O CD 

>- o 

o It 

ffl o 

CD 

.1= CT 

Q > 

ffl CT 
S O 

s ffl 
E * 
o w 

d CD 
ffl £ 
B CT 

.ffl ® 

O UJ 

pO 

2 CD 

■ H 4—< 

*3 o 

5 

-o o 

| CL 

CD ^ 
CJ P 
CD 


CO 

0 

3 

0 

03 

CD 

E 

c 

o 

"5 

CD 

0 ) 

c 

o 

o 

o 

CD 

C/3 

3 

O 

c 

o 

o 

3 

CD 

C 

o 

o 


a *5 


CT — 


CO 


05 S 

“ o 

^ 5 

o o 

Z CM 


CD ffl *- 


CD ** 

.2 O 
ffl U. 

e.q 

CD O 


~ 2 CD 
03 XI a) 
CD i- 

CT O W 

tr —i ffl 
O CO ffl 
Z O E 


•B © 
mB 
EO 

o ffl 
^ -P 


o o 


w O) 
O CT 
CT -Q 
CT >- 
CO 
a 

O E 


< 

o 

LU 

o 

c 

05 .—- 

9 — 

it CD 

c 2 
CT) ffl 

d o 


c 

o 

-2 CT 

2 ffl 

CD ' 

ffl "T 
© .2 
CD c0 

ffl CO 
CT CT 

E 8 
•B © 

C ' 


-o £ 

CD CT 
CT 8 
2 CT 


CT 

CT 


ffl -7-1 

O CT 
0- LL 


CT E 

5 0 

05 O 

CT CT 
CT C 

O « 

O) W 

p 2 

CD 05 o 


a 

< 

CD 
CT CT 
O ? 

ffl £ 

Q. CT 

CO ^ 

CT LU 

ffl krt 

CD 

O) C O 

ffl ffl < 
CT 
CT 


CT 

c 


CT CD 


CT 8 
0-5 

X5 ® 
C CL 
05 CO 


CM 


CC 

< 


CT 

C 

CT 

d 

_i 

CO 

o 

d 

<r s 

UJ _l 
U. CD 


< 

a 

UJ 

o 

ji= 

2 c ffl 
8 ffl>-2 
E w O 


c 

o 

o 

3 

L_ 

CO 

c 

O 

05 

k _ 

O 

Q. 

E 

CD 


CD 

a. 

2 CT 
O ffl 
CD S 
2 | 

tr ffl 
O CL 

c ffl 


o .o 

CT 


E s 

P LT ffl) - 
O 3 >> 

P £? CT 
raj 

o ? o ? 
■g sz ^ "c 
E ffl> E O) 
o 2 


4-^ -7-5 C 


Q. — 


CT 


3 vu 
O CD £ 
•f= C 


o 


£ 3 


•o 

CD 
CO 

3 

TD 
C 

i5 

IB 

c 

o 

o 

3 

L_ 

GO 

C 

o 

o 

O) 

E -D 


> 03 
03 

8 o 

W CD 

n 

L_ 

Cl z= 

o m 


ffl I "ffl 
§ 2-8 
(■) CD CT 

£ "ffl- 

>» c CD 

ffl O -Q 
, CT CT 

o -2 ffl 
J-b § 

CT '= > 
O)- 


c 

© 


5 ? 

O -P 


O C5) = 


y; 

> ra 

© CT 

*- o 

2 o 

CD 


CD 05 
§ CT 

o o 

= 3 
05 CD 


.CPo « 
ffl- 2 

C M 

ffl CT o? 
E 3 ffl 

ISg 

ffl 2 - 
r O i- 
ct ir © 

r- 3 > 

CT g I 

'5 V> CT 


c 

CD 

c 

CO 

E 
) _ 

CD 

Q. 

g 

CT 

C 

O CT 
Z .2 

_i 

ffl m 
© m 
O CD 
CT CT 
Cl — 

ffl t 
^ ffl 


03 !2 

I 3 

o g 


< 

o 

UJ 

o 

C 

03 — 
O = 
It! CO 
c CO 
o>i5 
(7) O 


.5 o 

8 5 

8 8 
03 C 
03 
O 
03 
Q. 

E 


CD 

g. 

’a. 

o 

c 

CD 

-C 


Ect 

El 


O) 

C 

Vi 

X 

0 

o 

CD 0 

O £ 
C 

0 C 
£ £ 
£ g 

CD 

L= CD 
CT CD 
CD ffl 
CT P 
ffl CT 
O C 
C CT 


CT) >- 
C CT O 


3 O 
CT c 
>- O 
CT ^ 

|| 

O 0 

I k— 

V -o 

O) C 
*3 0 

C C 
.2 .2 
o o 
3 3 

L_ L_ 
-*—* 4^ 

0 0 
C C 

o o 

o o 


0 


sz 

O) 


c 

0 

c 

0 

II 

a. co 

g 8 
© a. 
cr o 


CM 

oo 

a. 

co 


CT) 

C 

tr 

o 

C CT 

o 2 

E *3 

o B 

ffl 


< 

a 

UJ 

o 

fl 

CT o 
CD ~ „ 
8 ffl)-2 

E w o 


CD 

CD 


CT 


° P . 
C 2 CT 
O 2 © 
'« ^ 05 

ffl O 

g - ffl 
o * o 

E CT 0- 

c ffl £ 
CT ffl 

E m 

i_ *- CD 
ffl P CD 

a. ct 3 

ffl © CT 
_C Li c 

H g-co 

^ ^ 0 
TD 


_ 

0 .2 


0i” 

O 
0 
Q_ 
0 
0 


0 3 
O O 

g- 5 

P CD 
CL CT 

.2 3 


£ "ffl 

O C 
*= CT 
CT — 

CT) -Q 

:-5 © 

E o - 

O £ CT 

Z CT O 


© 

CT) 

C 


< 

O 

UJ 

O 

| CT = 
-C o — 

$ ^ 0 

8 §>js 

JiO 


CT * 
P = 
ffl C 
o © 

5 § 

X) CT 
CT CL 


-CT 

CT © 

£ .ffl 

L_ — 

ffl CD 

— CT P 


CD CT 
CT CT) 

"E CT 
£ ffl 

CT g 
CT & 
CD CD 
3 CT 

ct is 


ffl ra 
>> © 
= CT 

3 ffl 
CT) 
ffl CO 

ffl S 

o 

CT © 

ffl g 

ffl £ 
o ffl- 
O CO 


© 

CT 

> 


ffl © 
o E 

CD CT 

4^ 

2 < 

0- CT . 
-O ffl O) 
CT CT CO 
ffl -i 0- 
O g CQ 
O 2 Z 

Q.< .2 


CO 

oo 

CL 

CQ 


5-55 



















& 
05 = 

C -Q 

s'S 

c O 

1 » 

2 0) 

<r 


o 

_i 

OT 

O 

73 

c 

CO 

O 

cc 

UJ 

U_ 


0 

<n 
Q) C 
O O 
C := 

co co 

O 05 

W 

w 


< 

o 

HI 

o 

§1 = 

11“ 

8 05 ® 

_J w O 


c 

o 

o 


in 

HI 

_l 

CD 

< 


o 

0 

o 

k. 

0. 

c 

o 

<0 

c 

co 

a 

x 

HI 

a> 

c 

75 

CL 

a. 

.2. 

'co 

CD 

£ 


0 

£ 


E 

CO 

k_ 

05 

O 


05 

c 


c 

o 

ro 

05 


■» o 
8 ® 


CO is 


as 

£ 

> 

JO 

73 

CD 


CO c_> 

CD CO 

E c — 

-- o 

0 
3= 
CO 

0 
JO 


0 

05 


0 
c 
0 

05 c 

.2 0 
5 0 
5 -2 
5 3 

0 2 

JO £ 
~ TO 
C 05 
0 0 
E 0 
0 v 
CL C 

E g 
i o 
8 £ 
5 § 

0 O 
0 0 
CD to 

£ E 

I! 


© 

CD 
© 

CO 
CD 
c 

CO 
3 
_Q 

~o 
c 
03 
CO 
CD 
o 
c 
CD 

■g 

co 0 

p © 


CD 

£ 

o B 

3 

■O o 
c .c 
CD 

CD o 

£ £ 
i 

= c 
0 o 

c c 

0 05 
CL C 

o c 
o 

is 
| i 

CD 


If 

o 

0 -Q 

£ 5 

CO 
CD 


£ 

o 

© 

o 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CD 

o 

0 

2« 

® 0 

N 


£ 

>» 


N 0 

E ^ 

.5 ji; 


>> £ 


5 0 
0 

0 _ 
0 ,® 
CL 0 
_ 0 
0 05 
0 O 

£ 2 

§ to 
c 
CO 

u. ® 
CD £D 
CO 
CO 
Q) £ 
CO 
CL 


-C 

o 

c 


CD 2 
£ Q- 


E <: 


o 
CD ~ 

o 2 

O is 


o £ 

0 ® 
g 5 
w c 
0 .2 

£ 1 
0 2 

C 0 

o c 
— o 

0 O 

0 

■*- 05 
O £ 

O ~ 

Z O 

o — 

c ® 

E 0 

|i 

T“ 

E c 

CO jc 

i_ .tr 

2 . 5 

05 05 

c Js 
o ® 
c ■£ 

_© ™ 

2 s 

0 O 
0 C 
= 0 .. 
0 "2 0 
0 0 0 

i E 0 


CO 

u. 

3 

O 

f 0 
■£ 0 

O £ 
? C 

§£ 

c c 

05 0 
C CL 

•c o 

0 g 

0 „ 

0 73 

i= ® 

2S 

a o 

o CO 
3 CO 
^3 CO 
CO CO 

c © 

O 3 
O CO 

O - 
>* 
co "35 

fS 

© CD 
N 

I .i 

O C 
© *F 

© b 


© 

© 

o 

c 

© 

■g 

© 

© 

L_ 

© 


c o 
© 


0 

> 

o 

E 


0 c 

0 CL 

c c 
0 O 
0 = 
0 o 

05 2 

® 0 
73 C 
C O 
0 O 
0 0 

0)3 

c o 
'^£ 
o o> 

r- —^ 

0 2 
P5 £ 


0 
0 
0 
O 

2 0 
t g 
5 0 

is 0 
73 O 

Q) — 

O ® 

.2 0 

is 0 
0 o 

2 03 

o o 
0 0 
I £ 

03 © 

CD § 

O O 
3 


© © 
^ <0 


© 

LO C 

.E ’© 

© =3 
C ^ 

© 


© 

E 


© 

© 

0 ^ © 
> 

>% 
o 
c 

2 oo) 

E Q © 
©bp 

E £ © 


© .E 

o 

0 0 
£ 
c g 


05 

_c 

0 

k_ 

0 

CL 

O 

73 

O 

O 

05 


C 

0 

E 

g. 

‘o 

O’ 

0 

05 

c 

"c 

0 

c 

© 

E 

> 


© 

© "O 

I § 


c 

o 


•i "O 

C C 
C O 

b o 


cn 

c 

">s 

© 

L_ 

CL 

© 

L_ 

© 

3 

CD 

© 

L_ 

*o 

c 

© 

© 

o 

3 


© 

© 

£ 

o 

© 

© 

3 

© 

sz 


© 

3 

*o 

© 

© 

© 

5— 

CL 

CL 

3 

© 


© 

N 


£ E 

S) .E 

^ e 

o o 
c 

p © 

ga¬ 

ll 

C 0 
0 05 
73 7S 

2 S 

« C 
§■•2 

0 i: 
0 0 
£ C 

fS 

m 75 

i« 

^ 0 
c" ® 

o cc 
it; o 
73 'E 
g o 
0 0 
C CL 


0 
0 

73 ® 0 

E 2 c 

<0 (J o 
0^0 
0 g c 
o O 0 
c g p 
0 ^ .2 

P § Q 
0 -2 
0 g 

0 3 
B OT 

o § 

0 

0 0 = 
8^^ 
0 o 0 


o 

o 


0 
k _ 

o 

0 


c 0 ® 2. 


0 ® 


o 

E 

o 

E 

c 

E 

0 

c 

£ 

5 

© 

E 

£ © 
“ p 

CD 

c 


© 

w_ 

o 

5 


0 

c 

0 

g 

CL 

0 

£ 

O 

© 

C 


O g = 


CO ' 

0 o CD 

s 

73 > .7= 

s 5 § 


c 

o 


0 

co _ 

© CO 


CL P O 
3 .E o 
b © © 

.E 3 © 
- © D X} © 


© 

„§ 
O 0 
O £ 

5 r 

0 o 
c — 
0 0 


0 
-♦—> 
c 
© 
o 

■O 

© 

© 

o 

CL 

O 

i— 

CL 

© 


© 

© 

L_ 

© 

o 

c 

o 

o 

3 

© 

c 

o 

o 


© 

o 

© 

t= 

3 

© 

"O 

© 

o 

L_ 

TO 

© 

> 

© 

CL 


© 

© 


O 

3 


TO 

© 

© 

O 

o 


© © 


© 


o 

© 

CD 

TO 

© 

© 

sz 


© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

c 

TO 

TZ 

C 

© 

© 

© 

O 

© 

© 

CL 

c 

TO 

'© 

3 

C 

© 

;Q 

© 

0) 

O 

© 

c 

C 

© 

© 

Q_ 

TO 


© 

CL 

© 

CD 

L_ 

C 

£Z 


0 

© 

© 

X 

© 

© 


© 

L— 

o 

H— 

© 

CD' 


8.2 

m « 
2 -g 

c ^ 

g> 

in 


< 

O 

UJ 

O 

c 

© ^ 
g = 
it= © 

c 52 
g> © 
CO O 


o 

© 

CL 

E 


- 2 
CD JZ 

© © 

c\j tr co 

73 O O 

<§ c ® 

0 — g 
0^0 

S12 

® 0 CM_ 

0 0 0 “ 
0 0 C 

■“ 0 □ 
C 0 . 

0 0 CD 

3 8 0 

05 ® 5 

HI £ O 


~ _r o 


£ 

© 

© 

© 

L_ 

0 

0 

k— 

in B 

T— 

o 
CM 


2 » 

0 

73 0 
c 0 
0 0 

a i 

0 J2 

s § 

0 8 

— O 

o ® 

© *© 
© © 


>5 

-Q 

E ■ 


— O 


CD ^2 


© .O 
© 


© 

© 


© 
© 
o 
c 
© 
o 2 
o © 
© 

C cn 


i 2 

& 0 
© 73 
i_ 0 

0 _j 


© 

CL 

o 

73 

C 

0 

c . 
.2 o 
o 05 

2 2 

0 D. 

S 5 

O i= 


C <0 

O k. 

LS 0 
0 £ 
. 9 >E 


■rj - 

03 

D. 

CD 


5-56 












& 
o> = 
E -Q 
og 

c o 
o o. 
£ « 
2 © 

CC 


05 

c 


§ 2 

E 3 

O CT 
-7 © 


05 

c © 
3 £ 
M O 

O © 
— © 

w © E 

-1E 

r/i 


© 


© 


CD 

© 

sz 

h- 


o E « 
cl © c 
© c © 
ra a 


© 


T3 

c 

© 

o* 

_i 

CD 

O 

o' 

CC 2 
LU _1 
U. CD 


© 

£ u 
<^- 
© c 
o o 
c •.= 
© © 
o o> 

c ; 

05* 

CD 


< 

o 

LU 

o 

fl = 

w E © 

$ o>« 
_J © O 


< 

O 

LU 

O 


5 c _ 

2 g = 

© E $ 

8 a>£ 

_J « O 


o 

LU 

o 

c 

© = 

o — 

© £ „ 
g o >«2 

_J © O 


c 

© 

sz 


</) 

© 


p 

c 

o 

o 


in 

UJ 

_l 

CD 

< 


C 

o 

’35 

c 

© 

CL 

X 

LU 

© 

c 

© 

a 

ix 

© 

'© 

CD 


© 

■C 


E 

© 

w 

05 

O 


05 

C 


c 

o 

o 

ro 

05 


© 

05 


© 

SZ 


W 

© 

© 


C/5 

© 

O 

c 

© 


-O 

« i 

I£ 

© © 

■= ^ 

TJ © 
•*—> 

CO 

«s£ 

2 E 

© 

©' 05 
© 


05 

c 

'u 

3 

"O 

T3 

© 

© 

W 

C 

© 

-Q 

P 

3 

O 

5 

© 


o 

© © £ 
.c © E 
— © o 

p p o 

~ o 
c 
w 
© 
o 
T3 

O 
© 


5 £ 

£ i 

2 -o 

5 © 


P 

3 

O 

5 


_ c 
£ 'CL 

o © 
-P o 

£ -o 
© © 
£ iS 


o 

c 

o 

c 

0 ) 

> 

© 

© 

C/5 


11 

li 

£ © 

5 § 

£ o 


© 
o 
o 
w 
© 
© © 
© © 
CD © 
-C O 

•e c 
o ® 

2 g 1 

T3 £ 

© -9 
© © 
o .9 

eg: 

Q_ 03 
CO *0 

i g 

-2 © 

© © 
05 CL 
£ O 
£ © 
o © 
Z -O 


© 

p 

c i 

5 • c 
Oo® 

nT © o 

§2 I 

?■§ 

© 


©£ 
© > 


a — .£ > £ p o 


o. ro 


Eil 

o 


a) 


a> 

03 

c 

03 


CD 


03 


13 
O 
CO 
CD 

g * 
© © 
c * 


^ © © .52 
j_ - _ © < E O 

.05 LL © O Q p © 


"O 

© 

W 

o 

CL 

o 

Q- © 

5 © 

£ Q. 
03 

£ § 
2 | 
8 o 

c © 
© > 

O © 
TD 

CO 0 

O p 

o £ 
Q. 5 


© 

- W k. 

"O 05 O 

© c cr 
S'w 2 

1 op 

E O 3 

2 © § 
JC 


© S= 


o 

© 


O o 
»♦— ■+—' 
03 

E ^ = 
■§“ §: 
co © 
w £ © 
® o £ 
« £ 1 

« ® © 
CD © > 
^ o o 


88 i i 

© L ' E P 
© © © -^ 
DC C r © 

— m £ 
o c -2 
•c ^ Q--o 

S?!| 

C 03 

g 2*51 

_ t 0 x 
>- © > 

05 i= C_) 

2 2 O 


£ £ 

© © 

E p 

E 

E 1 
o © 

8 2 

*8 

O T3 

£ § 

3 »- 
O © _ 
g © O 
© O £ 
C CL 
© c 


© 


E o 


o 

C w 

© © © 
C! r\ •— 


^• c 


o 
© 
■4 —• 

i5 

© 

k_ 

c 

o 

o 

3 

k_ 

CO 

c 

o 

o 

© 

N 


c 

E 


> 

© 


CD 


CD 

C 

' 4 -' 

CO 

X 

© 

© 


c 

© 

o 

"O 

© 


O >, 

I f 

i <? 


£ © 


^ w 


S 05 


c 

!c 


>. 

© 


© 


© 


© 

E 

n 


K "LU 


9-x 
© 


aCJ 
Ego 
0 •*- 
© < £ 
o 2 g 
■6 CD Z 


tr q. cl 
O cl cl 
Z ro < 


o_^£$^ 

CL 

< _ 

O o © = 
a 'E « § 
o g ^ 8 


sz © ~ 
1 _ c o 
^ — o 

C&E 

|=6 

£. o 

© m -"I 

o c 8 

£5 ° & 

C ^" © 
© © C 


£ © 


p 

5 >> 

i ^ 

5 w 
© © 

•zr © 

© k_ 

CD © 

^ © 
r- © 

o ® 
z £ 

c 
© o 

© £ 
c o 
© © 

05 CL 

£ .i • 


•^= 0 
S-s 


a) > 


© _ 

E •- 
— © 
© © 

© E 
»- © 
© c 
© 


c 

© 

-C 

B: 


© 

T3 

O 

© 

Q. 

© 

CD 

© 

© 

3 

© 

© 

Q. 

*D 

O 

> 

© 


-C 

CD 


© 

jC 


C 

o 

© 

E 
© 
o 
© 
i _ 

c 

o 

o 


V) 
© 
© o 
o c 
•o © 


o 

c 

© 


3 £ 


o u- 


© £ 


© 

sz 


co r = 


Q? 


© £ 
£ o 
_ © 

c •§ 
— © 
4—' 

© c 
"co © 
.E E 


— © 

© T3 
-C © 

o 

CD k - 
C CD 
= c 
iS "co 

f2 X 
£ © 


c 

o 


o 

3 


© T3 
C C 

o o 
o o 

c 
o 


§ « 
° ro 
05 £ 
.5 o 
E 2 

•■= CL 


w 
O -L i 
0-0 
© 3 
> £ 
8 g 

£ o 
Sz o 
© © 
05 

•o O 

3 tr 
w g' 
c © 
© § 


© _ 

.52 © 

° S 
o .2 

o © 
£ 2 
© o 

£ © 
w 

U) . 
© C/5 

SZ © 

o © 

3 3 
© 

£ E 
O o 

© W5 


^5 © 


o 

■O >. 
© ••= 

8 1 

1 §■ 
T © 

c p 
.2 £ 
o © 


c >< 
o © 
O E 


3 

O 

° w 
-© © 

II 

5 © 
■o ■— 
o r: 
© © 
© .2 
o © 

£ 8 

© « 
o 2 

CL o 

E 2 

£ C 
© © 
■Of 

•O > 
3 “ 

o £ 

II 

o E 
£ © 
© E 

>, E 
c © 
ro w 

3 ® 

m £ 


© 

k_ 

o 

© 

m c 

O .2 

E co 
2 = 
I i 

05 

CD 


< 

O 

LU 

o 

ll = 

-do — 

CO ^ ^ 
© 05© 

_J © o 


< 

o 

LU 

o 

c 

© ^ 
2 = 
£ c/5 
c w 

05 © 

CD O 


< 

O 

LU 

o 


c 

© ^ 
o = 
£ © 
C C/5 
05 © 

CD O 


p 

3 

O 

o 

© 

© 


o 

© 

a. 

E 


■o 

© 

c 

c 

© 


© 


•O 

^ £ 
£ O © 

o £ -S 5 
c © 
© © 

E ^ 

c o 

© C/5 

E c 


o 

v> 

© 


Q.. 

-o © 
E 

CL 
O 

_ — © 
2 c > 
° o © 

O UT3 


O 

o 


21 
£ CL 
CL 


o 

© = 


O) 

c; © c 
© — w 
c © © 
o o’ o 

O 2 o 


S31 

If 

^ CO 

E £ 
© £ 
05 © 

© O 
2 © 
© sz 
E - 

_ w 

© © 
o sz 
© o 

CL 3 

w w 


o 

c 

© 

< 

o . 

Q < 
O 2 

© r- 
2 © 
< © 


« 

© £ 
g CL 
© = 

C ^ 

o © 
O £ 


© 


o © 
© © 


"O 
w © 

© ^ 
© © 
■ o 
o 


© _ 

© ^ 
© o 

£ iT 

.2 ~o 
o £ 
S © 

3 

0- CO 


£ o 

.tr © © 

o-o© 

s o$ 
© . £ 
.c < © 

I 

3 . *= 

o < £ 
£2 = 
„-cd 2 

.£.© 5 
o © § 

CL § Z 


t © 
© © 
o © 

§ 0‘2 
OUJ © 
— O © 
© < LU 

© o O' 

£ C LU 

* O 

£< 

£X © 
- O 

_ rra: 
8lu -* 
£o| 
o So. 


C 

s 

> 

c 

LU 


3 

O 


CO 

CD 


CO 

o 

CL 

E 

© 


§ 
o 
n 
o 

© ro 

CD _© 

05 O 
© 

© 

c > >> 
© >>-° 
^ © -O 
LU 5 £ 
JC o 

® O) 0 

£ -T- 

ui « 

c ^ © 
©On 


© 

p 

„ o' © 
o ~ p 

© © O- 

c £ 05 

1^1 

1 ©2 

05 o W 

5£^ c 

O «^£ 
— g' 5 o 

2 o - 2 

o £ 81 

© to 2 


2 £ 


o o 
c o 


C O 

•2 5 

© SZl 

.2> E 
■n o 


S "O 

I1 


in 

co 

CL 

CD 


co 

co 

CL 

CO 


oo 

CL 

CD 


5-57 














& 
05-= 
c .Q 

I'g 

o ®- 

.2 W 

^ CD 

x 


■a 

c 

0 

d 

_i 

CO 

o 

d 

x s 

UJ -J 
LL CO 


0 

4X o 
<^‘ 

0 C 

o o 

C -J= 
0 0 
O 05 

M 

CO 


< 

o 

LU 

o 

ll = 

.c o *— 
2) 

ffi 05® 

-J 55 O 


c 

o 

o 


in 

HI 

_i 

CO 

< 

I- 


CL 

c 

o 

‘0 

c 

0 

a. 

x 

HI 

0 

c 

0 

a 

0. 

.2. 

‘0 

CD 

x: 


0 


E 

0 

o> 

o 


05 

c 


c 

o 

0 

05 


-O 

0 

_N 

i— 

O 

x: 


0 

§ 

c 0 


05 




i- in n) 
0 0 P 
0 


C 

o 

0 

05 


Q) ® 
0 >< 
0 0 0 

0 ^ ’ 
o £ 

C o 

© T-. 

i- T3 


C .2 '55 


C/5 


.= 2 0 


0 •= o 


0 

o 

$ 

CO 

0 

c 

0 

Q. 

CL 

"O 

0 

C/5 

O 

a. 

o 

L_ 

a. 

0 

x: 

0 

i_ 

0) 


© 0 - 5 ,; 
t n .S’; 


o i 


CD 0 

> s 
>,£ 
§ © 
1 £ 
0) C/5 
_ 0 
CO 
C/5 
0 

= 1 
CO 0 


O 

0 

E 

o 

CO 

CO 

0 


o 

0 

■O 

0 

0 

o 

CL 

O 


0 


o 

c 


0 "O 

g o 

0 0 
5 s 

■ CL 

O o 
X 0 
sz 

.S’ E 

k_ I— 

0 

0 CO 


« c 
-00 
0 0 
o -2 


B --0 — CL 


sz u 


■O 
CD ™ 
Q. -C 

or 


05 o = 


i a) 
X= 


o 

I- 


Ss 

o z. 

>3 <D 

co 

. § o 

D O £ 
0 0 0 
0 C 0 

>00 

5 .9- 0 

O CL 0 


0 c 
> 0 

££ 

— x 

So 

£ e 

§s 

11 
9 0 
E 05 

© 2 
o 5 

o > 


It 

•5| 

c c 
O — 
= c 
0 0 
CD Q. 
CL <d 


0 o 
0 0 
o o 

l— 1— 

0 > 

8 


0 


03 

c 

• 

B c 

X <D 

0 o 

k_ 
0 
CL 


^ c 

t; 0 

§.f 

0 -9 
0 0 

>, > 
0 0 

? § 

9 © 

l,o 

x> 

Q) 0 

2 o 
£ _0 

0 a. 
0 >, 

§3 
9 ° 

40 05 
"O Cl> 

82 
* CO 
°-"D 

c 


CO 


0 TD 

£ 3 

CO I 
co > 

2£ 
o o 

.c 
o 

3 
0 
■o 
c 
0 
0 
jq 
0 


0 


3 

£ o 
— o 

> o 

> o 

c" 2 
0 o 

E § 
o . 

0 © •= 
Q- 2? 5 

0 3 0 


= '05 o 0 O 


0 


0-0 

0 2 o „2 
*- O O 1 


0 

■Q 


O 

CO 


0 
c 

O r- 
O ±5 


0 


£ c 

3 0 

I B 

0 © -a 
E £ © 

m O O 
0 •*— x 

CD .9 0 


0 0 
•o 0 

C X5 
0 O 
c 


5^o 
3 C — 
O o O 
g O g 

« O O 
t (0 ‘c 
0 2 -| 
co 0 E 


0 ° 
a, 0 

0 D 
0)0 ° 
•a .E D « 

3 05 x O 
DC>.» 

•= ® ^ > 
0 ca 0 ® 
tic 5£ 
0 ° 

^ CB ? 


2 9 

N ^ 

O 05 
■O 

3 ® 
jd 

^ O 

E 8 

J* >= 

0 ^ TD 

t 0 § 

° © 2 
■Q 

-D "5 
1 ® o 

X5 — 

O O 3 

g 0 o 

XJ d) i_ 

0 2 > 
-Q 2 x 

"O — 

S 0 u 
0-0 0 , 
> ^ c 
5 0 = 
>,0 0 
55 o X 


0 0 
v- 

O 0 r- 

I? 

® 0 
C > 

■2 £ 

Q. 3 

£ 0 
“g 0 
8 £ 

TO 05 
0 C 
05=: 

>1 

-Z1 03 

0 j® 

© © 
n -o 

1 = 

I £ 

o £ 

0 > 
o > 

0 ^ 

05 X 
0 


0 

•g 

> 

o 


0 

c 

0 

E 

o 

0 

CL 

0 

■o 

0 

0 

■o 

c - . 
0 "O 


■c 0 
0 ^ 
0 O 
0 £ 

0 
■O 

c "o" 
o 


■O S i: 


0 "O 
£ 3 
o 
o 


0 

.Q 


O 
0 
SZ 
0 

xo -o 

0 m 


o 

c 


> >- m 0 is “ 0 

? ® ® X m a> 


o 

CO 
CD 
3 
O 

§; 0 
« 8 


o o 
0 0 
o a- 

05 r 

E 05 
3 0 

_3 '—' 

O 0 
C 0 _ 

- O ° 
0 0 
0 Q. 

O W 

O T, 


0 


_ ^ 0 
“or « 

X I g 5 ® 


o 2 0 

So” £ 
o> c > 
•o 0 > 

0 -C >, 

jC >S 5 
h- -Q ^ 


03 
> 
03 

2 
c5 

3 

o 0 


•O 

c 

0 

o 


0 

X2 

O 

c 

p 

3 

o 

g 


0 


> 

05 

c 

o 

c 

■> 

c 

o 

o 


0 


■C £ 
0 


•0 
0 0 

0 O 
•O g 

0 x: 
2 0 
£ 0 
O g 


£ | 

II 

a. 0 
8 o 
■o >> 

5 ® 

■O c 
0 3 
05 © O 

§ ^ £ 
« 2 f 

0 3 C5 

5 if 
>. > 
0 co 
0 
40 

■o ® © 
3 — £ 
o 05 0 

g £ > 
•o 0 
x- c o 

O 0 > 
0 0 O 
- 0 Q. 
0 JD — 
0 C = 
i= 3 0 


0 »L 
X 3 x: 

05 

■O 

3 ® 

o £ 

5 © 

0 
'3 

05 

tsg 

3 TCI 

i= x: 

0 — 
c O 

O X3 
0 £ . 
05 >« 1 


c 

o 


0 


o 


0 x: 
0 


?■§ 


x: ® 
05.0 

•o tr 


d 

o 0 
O =o 
§ £ 


a> 

> 

co 

03 

CD 

£ 

CD 

CO 

"O 

c 

03 

> 

03 


CD 

O 

0 

m c 
8-2 
5 o 
g 2 

O) 

(/) 


< 

O 

LLl 

o 

c 

03 

o = 
it= co 
c co 

CO O 


o 

03 

Q. 

E 


0 SL 
0 X 

= O 

O -O 

■3 0 
-*—< ' 
CO 03 

£ C 
o> 

2 co 

3 CD 
O ‘O 
° O 
C 

o co 

CO 

O <D 
3 O 
w- o 
0 o 

o o 

o C 

O 0 


0 

> X3 


© £ 
xr 3 
— o 
>> 0 
0 g' 

8 i 

0 

c 9 

o 0 

o 3 

<D ® 

0 = 

0 ® 
0 .9- 

3 CL 


0 
0 
0 
k- 

03 
CD 

O O 

CO 

c 

CD 
CO 

>5 


CO 
CO 
CD 

o 
o 

t: <0 

>* c 

if 

0 o 
® .2 w 

80 - 

« Q. 

0 o 
0 £ 

0 C 
(D — 

0 


o 


0 


■S 3 


C 01 

O 1- 
■= 0 
0 X3 

.S»E 

~ 3 


CD 

OO 

X 

CD 


5-58 










c 

o 

o 


in 

Lit 

_i 

CD 

< 


C 

o 

'35 

c 

© 

a 

x 

UJ 

© 

_c 

© 

a. 

a. 

ra 

'© 

m 

.c 


<D 


E 

© 

k. 

05 

o 

k_ 

Q. 

05 

C 


c 

o 

o 

ra 

05 


2* 
0 ) 1 = 
5 r) 

s 1 

c ° 
o ©- 
¥ w 

SE CD 

oc 


CD 


CD C 
O O 
C ■= 
CO CO 
O O) 


C ’ 
05* 

CO 


CO 

05 


CD 

k. 

O 

© 

“ c 

8 .2 

S 

z ^ 

g> 

co 


o 

03 

CL 

E 


c « 

o »- 

•^= Cl) 
03 -Q 

. 2 > E 

•— 3 


IS 

I? 

-Q .55. 
© 5 

c/> CD 

2 -c 
sc -c 

o 

22 

5 -S 

O C 
c CD 

.2 CD 

♦X U 

9 - ©- 

o -2 

C/5 -O 

cd a> 

■o "P 


r> 

a 


CD 


’© ® 
© Q. 

■o E 

C ® 

is 

© o 
E § 
52 co 

“3 CD 


05 _ 

w o 
2 co 
co co 

c 

< 


W C 
CD CO 

E E 


CD 

CD T3 

|1 


CO O 

c ~ 

05 r: 

co .S? 
_ 

CO CD 
§£ 
co 
■o c 
o 

CO 

2 co 


co 

'co 

CD 

tE CO 

z! 

03 

^ -C 


rr» CC □ 


03 


CD 

CD 


03 


C 

*03 

c 

o g 
n E 

CD o 

<= o 

o 


< 

0) 


o ~ -c 

or 


O- 
~ CO 
T3 ^O 
CD g 

2 8 

05 CO 


o o 

— .o 

•8 a 


CO CD 


■D 

c 

03 

CO 

u. 

0 

CO 

3 


Q 
03 

E 

3 
> 
~ 0 


'•u 

0 * 

0 co 
-c 0 
0 

*0 5 - a 

CD -Q ^ 


2^ 
To O 

§lT 


.= o 


_ XJ 
CD 05 


#.I 

Z 2 

. CD 

.1 I 

Is 

CO -O 

£ 8 


>N 

sc 

"O 

CD 


co 


>> 

o 


X3 CO >5 
CD CD CO 
"O 05 


Q. CO 


CO 05 
CD ' 

2- ° •- 
CT CO 


CO ^C\J 
C C k_ 
Q5 O 


® © = 2 . 


— 2 
>. 3 

co o 

$ § 


OT CT 05 


D C <D C 
— •= CO o 
S 1 -® c 
o ©-£ 


CD 

C 

k— 

o 

♦x 

C "O 
o £ 
E 3 

O O’ 
¥ 05 


LU 

o 

S C 


CO 


w v 
0 = 
o — 


5i s 

8 05® 

J so 


II 
ii 

Q ■o 

Q 3 

x § 

CD 3 

r: -o 
05 © g 

'§ ® 8 

3 -C E 

m ® 3 

CO £ 

© r- 

o 2 c 

k- O 

O o 

"r co •= 

2 o o 
■° © 2 
T3 Q. o 

g.i £ 

0 C »- 
C m 

’c 

o E 


05 

c 


CO 


■O 
© 

© v> 

CL O _ 
nag 


2 

3 

O 

5 

CO 

co 

© 


“■ CJ 

w = 


X 5 

3 


° C 
05 O 

io 05 ® 

© c= ~ 

s E I 

i -7 O 


be -i c 


© 

O -O -C 

5 3 Z1 
o o o 

O 5 CD 

Or » 

III 


3 

■O 05 
■O C 
® © 

1 O 

CO o 

2 Q 
cd Q 
■Q X 

^ ® 
CO r- 


k. o 

CD 

> ^ 
>- O 

® | 

5 s. 


■o 

o 

*u 

0 

a. 

0 

0 

0 

3 

0 

O 

0 

n 

c 

o 


0 


0 


0 
c 
o 0 

O -Q 


O 

LU 

O 

|I = 

£ o — 

®| M 
8 05 O 

_j 5 ) O 


© 

xz 

2 — 
3 CO 

o © 

O CD 

w to 

© 3 

II 

o o 


CO 


© 


c © .r 
.2 {3 DC 
O 05 O 

c 2 o 

o © o 

O'-oO 


05 

CD 

Q. 

CD 


05 

c 

*k_ 

o 

c ■o 
o £ 
E 3 
O O’ 
Z 


© 


< 

O 

LU 

o 

11 = 
£ o — 

co ^ w 

8 § 5-2 

_J © O 


© 

£Z 

♦-X 

2 ° 
•2 (u 
o CO 
3 =3 


_ CO 
W O o' 
c o -o 
° .2 > 
O co | 

. © 

= o CO 
■2 2 C 
8 

c © •= 

© -i 5 
c 5 ■o 

o co ® 

° £ © 
0 >E Q. 
.5oc 

w c c 

3 E o 

O k o 

■a 2 ® 
© E -Q 

8 11 

§-8 8 

8 

-2 c § 
c ~ o 
.2 3 © 

§,8 “ 
.23 O ffl 

•g p .© 

z I® 


< 

O 

LU 

o 

ll = 

8 c® 

8 05® 

« o 


3 

O © 
O >- 

_ 0 

B 'O 

I— CO 


DO -O to 


© 


© 


.c a. o 

*= 3 O 
O 

© "O 


W 05 

c 


W CD 3 

D a d 


o 

CT5 

0 . 

CD 


T3 

C 

© 

d 

_i 

CO 

o 

d 

DC 2 
LU _1 
LL CD 


< 

o 

LU 

O 

c c ^ 

5 8 = 

8 c® 

8 05® 

—J « o 


>% -^ « 
O m = 
-5 2 o 
c E 3 
© ® O 
© Q.O 

Mo 


o 0 
CO 

O 0 c 
0 0 
0 a) 

(D ^ D. 

p Q. 3 
> 0 0 
o 0 ^ 

0 (J) "O 

III 

re « ® 

8 2 

E; r: 

® r © 

o CO E 
O (A 3 

8l 8 

'i ° e _ 

_ = ^ ca 


© 


c 

o 


]3 

I ® To 
S -g o) 
co 5 : = 

^8 E 

CD © — 

^ Q ’i 

O C Q. 

Z © © 


X3 

O 

a. 
o 
i_ c 
o © 

>*- JC 
CD O 

To tc 
« © 
c © 

© © 
Q.XJ 

E X5 
O E 
o © 

■O TD 
C C 
© © 

"O 

^ 2 

r- o 

Q. § 

m ^ 

2 8 

© > 

© 5 

®- ^ 

— -O 
© 

■° w ® 
© © 
T3 :-tr 


■o 
© 
o 
-*—• 
o 
o 
© 
r> 

o. .2 o 

wow 


c 

3 

© E 
8 £ 
I 3 

o-§ 


< 

a 

LU 

o 


c 

© ^ 
o = 
it: W 
c w 

05 © 

w o 


.© I 
II 

© C 

© 5 

© g 

2 'i 

.2 

O 9-> 


W T5 

O o 


c 

© © 

.a © 

2 ■§ 
o 2 

o -© 

5 © 

— c . 

2 □ o 

- 1 — I _J 

< m S 

s 5 -o 

-O C\J 

^ CO 
8 ” 
O CL 


05 

Q. 

CD 


5-59 













& 

o>= O 

C .Q _l 

5c o 

o I 1 

CD CD 

a: o 

a: 

LU 


© 


o c 
o o 

C p 

0 oo 
o O) 


c ■ 
g>" 
CO 


c 

o 

o 


in 


CO 

< 


c 

o 

‘to 

c 

(0 

a 

x 

LU 

a> 

_c 

0) 

Q. 

Q. 

w 

'(0 

m 

■C 


0) 
s: 


E 

<o 

05 

o 


CT> 

c 


c 

o 

'•p 

(0 

05 


tO 

05 


a> 

l_ 

o 

o 

CO- 


05 o 
o p 
£ to 

8 p> 


c * 

co 


CO 


o 

CO 

Q. 

E 


C a 
O >- 
■p © 
(0 -Q 

. 2 s E 
•— o 


< 

O 

LU 

O 

0 0 


o — 
p m 
F to 
C CO 


co_ 
to O 


c/> 

0) 

o 

(A 

CO 

CD 


O . 


co 

c 


to 

■X 

0 

0 

5 

CM 

•e 

o 

to 

0 


C0 


«# -3 

O) 73 

S t; 

p o 

c to 
a> © 

£ CC 

is 

o 0 

■*— »_ ,. 

o © 0 
-£= > > 
— ~ k_ 

■g CC Q 

0 ® 0 
p -C k_ 
0 — 0 
0 C •> 
a°~ 
E w a - 
o .£ 
£ 0 ^ 
3 0. 0 
O E 5 

p 


0 

c 

0 

o 

k— 

03 

o 

i= 

03 


CD © 


O 

CO 

L_ 

CD 

C 

g 

o 

0 

J0 


0 

2 to 

O S 


■0 

0 


c 

o 

o 

0 

w 

0 

c 

o 

o 

o 

tr 

0 

0 


.0 N .2 

fill 

- C £ 

|eS 

z 


•§■ 0 

co — 

j= £ 

■C o 

O (D 

Z .a 


> jc 
o o 
0.0 
C 

0 0 

^ 0 
0 

E 

CL 

3 

cr 
0 
c 
o 

o 

3 


3 

O 


0 

0 

0 

C 

3 


3 

O 

x: 


x: 

g> 

> 

0 

*0 

O) *n 

c 0 

*3 N 
3 C 
*0 O 
JZ 

7 "3 
0 0 

0 0 

■R © 

8 ® 
0 
0 


0 2 
0 

o ® 
0 £} 
05 ® 

|1 
-a a 
0) 


0 to 0 
|| £ 

8 I o> 

p > p 

p O 2 
0 to 0 


0 

c 


to 


_ 0 p 
0 0. 0 


o 
c 
-o 0 


0 

o 


5 £ 


j= 


© 

X 
0 
-c 
o 

to 

0 w c 
‘-©0 

® 0 £ 

^to 
— 0 
0 O 

0 -p 


0 

L— 

§ 

O 


to 
to 
0 

^ o 

3 0 O 


0 
® -c 

0 -5 
o s 

0 

to 0 
0 


O -* P 


0 
0 
£ W 
0 


c 

'0 


0 

Q. 

CO 

c 


0 


to 

c 

o 

to 

k _ 

CD 

Q. 


0 


E.2-g 
0 0 to 


o 

5 2 

S §5 

If 
I 2 “ 

E « ® ? 

g o 0 

Elf” 

o 


0 


0 


0 

JO 

33 

0 

o 

$ 


.£ o 
o 0 
o tz 
00 ca 


o > .2 E 

r: ~ •= 


to 

CO c 

o 
o 


0 to 

0 0 
o > 

& 0 


o £ 


0 

0 

o 

g 


Q 5 0 
o- o 

O O 


CO 


0 


0 w > — 

5 = O S 0 


sis 

0 o C 

00® 
0 is E 


o ® 
0 

C JP 


to >, .5 

80® 
Pg 

CD -^3 

E 8 


0 32 k_ 
0 2 ® 
0 ® £ 
jt: 0 0 

? >0 

CD a) 

CD 

E 
g_ 
'3 
a* 

CD 
>> 
> 
03 
CD 


£ 03 
- 

® § 
E 
'c 
E 


0 05 ® 2 
~ 2 05 

0 O 0 c 

c ^ c o 
o £ 0 o 


XL 

k_ 

o 
5 

C 0 to~ 
0 0 
co= 0 
coo 

•P £ c 
0 0 0 
0 Q-£ 


o © 
£ o 


< 

o 

LU 

o 


c 

0 .—• 
p = 
£ « 

c S 2 

05 30 
CO O 


0 

£ ^ 
_ o d 

S- c q. 
Cl 0 _ 
^ o ^ 
0 0 c 
££000 
0 0 


0 

o 

O 0 
to 0 

©1 
;> ir 

o ® 

03 «3Z 
w 

go 

O to 
2 => 
w o 

2 ® 
O t 

O 0 


0 w 

0 O 

c 


.2 5 


r 0 CO 


_J O 


03 

2 o 

0 0 uj E 
oc tr co 0 


CM 

05 

0. 

m 

z 


0 

c 

0 

O 

_i 

CO 

o 

d 

CL 2 
LU -J 
LL CD 


o 

LU 

O 

|I ; 
£ .2 
to 
(D 


C/3 
C/3 

to O 


0 0 
N 

a) 
x: 

■O 
03 

■Q 
C 
03 


I 0>| 

E £ 0 


o o 


to T3 
O -F 


2 > 

0 18 
05 O 

® c 

05 0 

0 a. 

Q-O 
2 O 
Q.CL 
CL CO 

® to 
© .-P 


^0 
J= 0 
O 0 
c 0 
0 o 


toE 

= © 
CL^ 

W 

_ 

E i 

0 E 

0 05 

E E 

co E 

85 

0 0 

M 5 CM 
2 0 CM 

f '© 

o CO CO 

-*-> r— ~Z- 

o £ _ 
o 3 7 .E 
Q. o 

C z ^ 

c CD 

— • 

— p to 


0 0 
'0 tfl 


0 £ = 


CO s £ 


Z £ £ 


o p 

a. to 

E § 

£ o 


< 

a 

LU 

o 


c 

0 ^ 
2 = ~ 
£ w 

c 2 
05 0 

d o 


0 

0 

o 

o 

« 0 to 

0 0 05 

£ '55 
•f g 0 

t\ UJ -*—• 

©S' 0 

g§ 


o 0 
P c 
0 


0 

5 

« 

0 

o 

0 


to 


O 0 


£ O N 

,9 c 0 
O 0 0 


co 

05 

CL 

CO 

z 


0 

c 

0 

d 

_1 

CO 

o 

d 

cc 2 

LU _1 
LL CO 


a 

LU 

o 

p 0 = 
£ o — 

to c ® 

g 05 ® 

-J to O 


0 


00^ 

p r 

® i = 

» 0 . 


— 05 

2 2 
0 -J 3 

l: 
0 .£* 
c — 
o >> 
£ c 
0 0 
0 o 
0 0 
>_ CO 
o 


2 <= 

S- 0 

0 — 


5 

0 

c 


0 

CL 
0 
o 

0 to 
■C 0 
—■ p 

£ - 
’0 05 

a. c 

0 0 

II 

0 0 
'0 w 
CQ 0 


■C SZ 
O P 

Z 5 


> 

E 

0 
'0 
o 
w 

g 

o __ 
0 0 
■Q p 
2© 

§ 0 

.2 § 
p -2 

f I 

0 05 

i § 

O 0 

05 -Q 

0 0 

o £ 
0 o 
0 5 


< 

O 

LU 

O 


c 

0 —^ 
2 = 
£ to 
c to 
053 O 

CO O 


0 

c 

0 _ 

2 0 

S\i 
£ £ 
0 8 

& E 
0 .£ 


p to 

0 0 


0 

o 


0 = 

to '0 « 

p 0 0 


-o- 

05 

CL 

CO 


5-60 














c 

o 

o 


m 

LU 

_l 

CD 

< 


C 

o 

’© 

c 

© 

a 

x 

LU 

u 

_c 

© 

a 

a. 

es 

'© 

m 


o 

-C 


E 

ro 

i— 

o> 

o 

k. 

CL 

03 

c 


c 

o 

<3 

03 


o> = 
E ia 

1 c 

o ®- 
£ © 
S a) 
CC 


CD 

C o 
<^‘ 

CD C 

gg 

03 CD 

o o> 

C 5 

g>- 

CO 


CD 

03 


CD 

L_ 

O 

© 

“ C 
8-2 

S ® 

8 

c i 

g> 

CO 


o 

CD 

a. 

E 


c « 
o >- 
m a) 
ca .□ 

.£> E 

~ 3 


O) 

c 

o 

c T3 

o 2 
S-5 
o cr 
-5 ® 


< 

O 

UJ 

o 


c 

CO 

3 

w 

cn 


CD 


w 

8 0)2 
— i w O 


© — 

1 8 
0)5= 
*•= CO 
CD 

CD ^ 

C C 
</) CO 
2 .2 

H 1 
. CD 

C '0 
o ^ 
*•5= o 

S = 

W ZJ 

E o 
o > 
o > 

g>J 


w 

CD 

O 

£: 

CD 

CO 

o 

5 

3 

CL 


= O 


CD 


3 ~ 
© '-2 
I ®- 

CD 03 
3 O 
CD O 
3 cd 


3 £ 
o 3 
3 § 

s ° 

O 
CL 
O 


® © •=> 


CD 

_ © 
a. ca 
to a; 

c « 
o •- 

0 E 


E tr 

5 -c 

Z co 


- o 


>>c 

= 00 
-Q r? 
2 © 

'© £ 

> o 

03 © 

CD 55 
C ® 

•— o 

CO X 

n cd 

Bjs 


< 

a 

LU 

o 

C ^ 
(0 = 
o — 

© 3 CO 

© o >2 
j »o 


c 

CO 

3 


CD 


o © 

© CO 


o 

L_ 

CL 

CD 

■*- .-= 0 ) o 
O C0 

o O 
.2 a. 

o E 

o 0 

00 *0 

Ms 

O o 


3 

O 

o 

CD 

>» 

3 

CO 

CD 

u 

CO © 
CD Q. 

£ o 
Z ® 
.E Q- 

c S 
2 O 
in £ 

2 o 

3 — 
0.0 
o o 

Q. CO 


in 

03 

CL 

CD 


c 

_ (0 — 
On© 
CD £ n 


CD 


£ -c 

3 m 


W o 

® 5 © C 

“ © E -2 

■ 2 . a c © 

05 c § O 

CQ « » =S • 

J= Q-a&O 

•c c . 2 s © ac 

2. O F CO J-LI 

2 o E .t; u_ 


< 

O 

UJ 

o 


S c ^ 

5 8 = 

© ^ CO 
8 03® 

J'iiiO 


fl 

|i 

E *“ 
o 
o 


CD 


W 


« « 
© o 


® "n CO 


i: © 

CO 

© o 


© 


SI 

©" o 

2 © 
© T3 
© © 
> © 
© C 

J= © 
w ^ 
© ■" 

© 
c © 

1! 

O CO 

o © 

« '5 

o c 
o © 

_l © 


c 

© 

o.E 

© iS 

■O ® 

■O O 

3 ? 
O O 

§ « 

.©■© 

“ 1 
±= 0 
o ® 

7 O 


■o 

c 

© 

© 

© _co 

'o © 


o 2 

o © 

5 E 

3 "O 
CL C 

-o 10 
= ©‘ 
® o 

© O 
o . 

o c 

Q. © 

E 


© 


>, 

o 

c 

© 

CD 

L_ 

0 

E 


■ c 

o 2 © 
.® Q- § 
o © — 

Q. « £ 
© o 

S 8-© 

k- 0 c 

O CC .2 

T3 >.© 

© O O 

3 ® § 

O- 03 E 

F E 

5m 8 


n © 


Q. © 
3 C 
C7 © 
© *_ 
O 

© © 
I® 

O O 
CO w 

© © 
Q-£ 

© £ 
-3£ © 

® © 
X3 

2 ® 
II 

5 © 


< 

0 

UJ 

a 

c 

© ^ 
o = 

in CO 

c w 

03 _© 

CO o 


_ © 
© © 
•O 


© CO 


2 > £ E 


■O »- 

§ I 

© 8 
© 2 
o o 
C c 

83 ® 

© "O 

_ © 

© V) 

o © 
o © 


® r- 

cl£ 
032 
£ $ 

©1 

.2 § 


3 © 
■° 0 
8 o 


<n 

03 

*? 


£ 

~ © m 
5 o ® 


5 "O 
® © 
© ~ 

© . 
© © 


£ 2 
0 • 

© 03 © 
_ C © 

® S n 
p o £ 3 > 


n - = T3 


® 
C 

o © 


S E 


0 0 o 
0 


•— z 

O 0 


^ UJ u > 
— cn 

c O 

o .E 


© 

•2 — m 

— o ® 

o 3 S 

^ -F o 
© g « 
2 8 2 


© c 
o5.2 

SfS 

O) .E ^ 

© n © 
F © c 

E © o 

© £= o 


co 

03 

CL 

CD 


03 

c 


c ■O 

o 2 

^ 3 

o cr 
¥ ® 


o S' 

ra rf 

2- w 

Z 2 
© O 

g < 
© o 

C LU 

© CJ 

CD ii 


•O 

© 

w 

o 

Cl 

O 


c 

o 

© 

O) 

E 

o 


o o 
ro l 

c © 

E co 

— © 
© o 

g < 
© 0 
2 LU 

© o 

CD 


c © 
2 © 
© © 

is 

o 03 

3 2 
3 

o 


O £ 


1 ^ 

03 

CL 

CD 


o 


o 

_l 

w 

o 

3 

c 

© 

O 

CC 

LU 

LL 


< 

0 

LU 

o 

Sis- 

£ o — 

c 2 C ^ 

S §>iS 

J’coO 


T5 

C 

0 

CO 

> 

0 

CD 


0 

*0 

0 

O 

■o 

0 

> 

0 

CL 

C 

D 

*o 

c 

0 

T3 

0 

> 

0 

CL 

0 

0 

O 

L_ 

o 

0 

C 

o 

o 

D 

L_ 

0 

C 

o 

O 


0 


0 

3 

o 

£ 

0 

0 


*0 

O 

-C 

© 

E 

O) 

c 

CO 

w 

o 

o 

© 

o 

J3 


© 

> 

J3 

3 

© 


5 £ 


£ £ © 
•= r- P- 


© 

© 

> 

O 

L— 

Q. 

CL 

0 

■o 

C 

0 


0 
CL 

J>N 
0 
0 

0 
L_ 

Ql 

^ 0 
2 0 
> 0 
o .2 

z i 

| 5o 
S ? 


0 

X) 

0 

o 

Q. 

Q. 

0 


3 

O 

c 

0 

Q_ 

O 

L_ 

o 

■0 

0 

o 

JD 

0 

n 


CD 

c 

Ql 

3 

3— 

0 

'~o 

■g 

‘o 

> 

0 


9 

0 

S 

O) 

■o 

0 

o 

0 

v_ 

3 — 

o 

■O 

0 

o 


0 
'0 

“ © 

1 © 
0 © 

Z 3 
©2 
O) © 

E 

'© © 
© « 
o « 

o O- 
3 ® 
© 2 
o ® 
© 

tr © 
3 © 

SI 

0 

Q. ® 

2 5 

< 2 

C 
© 


3 

o 2 


3 
© © 
■4—' — 

3 -Q 

o \n 
£ 8 
5 2 


3 o 

1 ® 

> 3 
o © 

£ 3 
£ © 
c 
- o 

3 © 
© © 
•5 2 

S’ o 

2 c 


- © 


2 3 


2 3 


— w 
© w 


_ © _ 

> o « 

>03 


© .© 


r- 1 - 

© 2 
Q. 


O ra n 
2 © © 
3= w £ 
© © c 

£ O © 
© ^ 


3 

c 5 
© © 

9- © 
o »- 

II 

>- o 

© 3 

> C 

o © 

03 

£ o 


. © 

^ o 

$5 S £ a £ 


o c 


® ® 3 

iS g 


j© © 

Q. 03 
_ © 
03 © 

®. 8. 

© c 
© •= 
© 


© 

3 

3 

I S 

sS 

E ^ 

© ^ 
© o 

o 

o 


© 
c 

® S S 


« — 


c © 
o ® 
2- © 

— © 52 

— © P 


>> 
o 
c 
© 

O) O 
© -5 
© — 
o O 

~o 


0 


0 

O 


Q. ^ 
CL § 
0 § 


Z • ® O 

3 *0 

2 8 

© El 

■o >, 

« € 

2 = © 

© 

I! 

ii 

a. © 


c 

c « 

o W 

© f= © 
>00 

© 2 c 

W "O 

O 
o 


7= © .E 
® « © 
O © c 
C E 
3 Z 2 


"® E '© 


o ® 


© . 2 .® 


© 


o > 


E c 
® 0 
CL ^ 

E 0 

i o 

J § 

© ^ 


— — — © o 
CD CL O.CD Q. 


c s 
© ® 
a.£ 
o © 
Z © 
© © 
o *- 

© 

. o 
© >- 
© © 
2 £ 

1 ? 
6-5 

c ® 
® © 
Bo. 

F E 

i 8 


< 

o 

LU 

o 

c 

© ^ 
o — 
itr w 
c © 

03 © 

CO O 


§0 

0 0 
■o { - 
0 .E 

2 — 
© © 
0 2 

O 3 

© 3 

c 2 

2 5 

o co 
2 « 
© 5 

C 3 
O 03 

O Z 


c 

3 B 
o 
3 


« 
c 
o o 

IS 

°-Z 

II 

o 3 
© © 
Q. 3 

E 0 
.E o. 

E 8 

© 2 


£ © 


03 

3 

O 


© 

© « 
ffl ® 

CL ® 

w © 

0 4— 

F= 

> -® 

B2 
© 0- 


03 

03 

CL 

CD 

z 


5-61 



























2 * 
o> = 
E -Q 

1 c 

O ©- 

2 © 
© 
cc 


05 

c 

*L. 

o 

•M 

C "O 

o £ 

E 3 
o cr 
-? © 


O 

_i 

OT 

o 

■o 

c 

© 

O 

CC 

LU 


© 


© C 
O O 
C -J= 
© © 
O 05 

Is 


CO 


< 

O 

LU 

O 

c 

5 S = 

tt £ © 
© F w 

© 05 — 

_J to O 


O 

LU 

o 

ils* 

£ o — 

© £ © 
© o> 2 

_J © O 


c 

o 

o 


in 

LU 

_l 

CD 

< 


CL 

c 

o 

‘35 

c 

ra 

Q. 

X 

LU 

© 

c 

© 

Q. 

51 

ra 

'ra 

CD 

■C 


© 

.n 


E 

ra 

Lap 

05 

O 


05 

C 


ra 

05 


C/5 

> 

© 

§ 

■O 

© 

o 

L_ 

CD 

-C 


03 

O) 


■o 

0 ) 

CO 

O 

CL 

O 

L_ 

CL 

CO 

c 

o 


c 

o 

00 

0 

o> 

c 

o 

o 

2 : 

g> 

To 

co 

03 

jz 

>% 

03 

£ 

TD 

03 

O 


0 

O 

£ 

CO 

v_> 

3 

o 


0 


a 8 

w x: 
■2 o 

ra £ 
— ^ y **~ 


> 

x> 

>- 2 
2 © 
o x: 
© — 
W. - 
~ >* 

O > 

0 o 

£ X 

^ j= 

0 O) 


^^ 000 ; 
>- ^ ‘3 


O) v' 
— c "1 


•■55 ^ S 


>. 

0 

TD 


0 


»- 0 0 


O CQ 


o 

3 

5— 

0 

c 

o 

o 

03 

C 

*u 

3 

TD 

c 

o 

0 

O) 

'e 

o 


© 

c 

o 

o 

© 

c 


© £ 


© 

© 

05 

c 

o 

o 

l_ 

o 

>» 

© 

© 

•O 

o 

c 


u. iu T-J 


_ © 
c 9- 

O 3= 
O O 

© 05 

£ c 

il 
>> 
0 

5| 

o V 


© c 
1 § 
Jl 
8 I 

Q- o 

XT' O 


05 

c _ 
o © © 

t= SZ C 
© ■" © 
T3 © >- 
© O © 

© => J3 

Q.'S E 

© ir 3 

© -o c 
-© 3 © 

2 o £ 

3 5 _- 
§x © 
< o »- 

*Z 9> 
o 5 o 

5 -o . 

So 


2 

?! 
0 C 
c ~ 
o 


o 

3 

L_ 

© 

C 

o 

o 


c 

o 


2 E 


o o 


© 05 
3 'O 

_ c 

E 2 
o t> 

© 3 
•O £ 
3 g 

i © 

5 o 


^ © 
3 2 

1 2 

2 © 
© -o 
3 ■= 
o © 

5 © 
8 © 

1 C 

2 ra 

oo © 
c 2 
O >, 


CL © 

© o 
c o 
o 


o 


© 


© 
c 

o _ 
o ra 
= © o 

© -C 

k— 4—’ *4— 
© >k- © 

> O £ 
° -C c 


-= © »r 
O © O 
O 3 £ 
§ © XI 
O 05 

cl. 2 '= 

~ © © 
£ E o 

o -^= 2 
!c © °- 

© C Q) 

> o JZ 
c ><■£ 

O C 05 

•^= ra c 

o __ o 

E ra ra 
^ >> 


© £ 
© 


05 


O) 


•5 § © 

= “ g. 
© £ .§ 


0 

o | 

° ra © 
© 
3 

cr 
© 
« 


o O 

O ra 

© © 

3 © © 

o-'-e " 
© ra 


£ .E £ o. E 


0 

^ 2 
O 3 
0 

C 0 
0 0 
CL E 
c 

0 .9 
E 

© 05 
05 £ 

8 E 
© 05 
2 £ 

gj 

© o - • 

uZ •*- © 

© c5 
£ £ © 

— « 2 
c © c 
© s: •“ 

5 c © 

2 © m 
0.-0 S2 

p — © 

•= x: V 
o .© .© 

O § | 

.ra | § 
m ® E 

x: < .5 

tr E 

o oo ^ 
-7 zz. o 


o o 
© SP 

o ,-ra 
£ £ 
co © 
co 

© 


0 -ra s 
E o 

II 

E 


0 

TD 

C 

3 

TD 

0 

C 

0 

c 

0 

E 

0 

-Q 


0 § 

£ 0 

■g © 

^ © 
£ M 

ra ^ 

to o 

•— w 
© © 
X5 ^ 

£ 8 
3 "~ 

^ CM 

© -r-, 

2 ? 
© © 
CL 

-k_ 

o_ ra 

5 8 

£ o 


© 

2 

CM W 

II 

11 
I s 

E ■* — 
ra ra 

< © 

w ^ 
C O 
O C 

•5 ro 

3 © 
£ © 
« c 
-o ra 
o o 


H 

o co 
ra ra 
© o 
2-0 


-o £ 
© o 

o S 

II 

o 

k _ .. 

o ~ 

-O 

-O 2 
© © 

o ©- 

^ © 


© 

X5 


2 « 


© 


>4 
© 
© -O 


-O 

3 £ 
o 3 

g ! 

0 0 
c c 
o o 


0 

> 

■M 

3 

O 

0 

0 

C 

o 

o 


c 

o 


o o 
0 0 
0 0 _ 

0 0 O 

^ -p o 
.E .E o 


0 


-o 

c 

0 

0 

c 

g 

o 

x: 

o 

© 

© 

o 

© 

c 

o 

o 


3 

o 

g 

© 

'© 

CD 

x: 

■c 

o 


« © 
© X3 

8 O 

2 -o 
q. cu 
c © 
o c 

o © 
2 £ 
to w 
c c 


© 


© £ 

« £ 

© 5 
-ra 5 

- >. 
o ^ 

V_> CD 

3 2 
T3 £ 

0 o 

c c 
— 0 
JD 

CO TD ~ 

O 
3 


2 0 

3 ^ 

il 


o 


ij 0 
O -C 
o 

0 o 

c "O 
o 

o it= 


CO 

0 

0 

0 


•O 

c 

3 

o 

L— 

© 


© ^ 


© ra 


C 3 

o o 


ra >_ 
© o 

Q. © 
2.1 
2 =5 

•O c 
© o 
o O 

L_ _ 

0 0 
JZ o 
0 

CD) Cl 
C 0 

a I 

X2 © 

© >k 
« £ 
© c 

-c © 

© T3 

si 

Q. © 


£ o 
Q- g 


c © 
o ® 

XJ © 

o © 

3 05 

£ ra 
© '© 

§1 
© c 
x: © 

OT 


c © w -p c 

— -7—» »— © 


c © 
-g 

"O '© 
© © 


o 

g 

c 

9 

o 

3 


XI © 
** © 
T3 -© 

ra o 
© « 

ra © 
ro £ 

OQ 3 

o 

x: 5 
■c 
o 


-O 

© 


o 

c 

© 

X3 


3 

O 


03 


2 

3 

o 


■O 

© 


OT 

c 

.0 

O 

3 


0 
0 

o 3 itf 


0 


© 

© S 

1 2 c 

E S 
o ra¬ 


ti 

© 

< 


© 
© -o 

= © 


« 

© ^ _ 
£ c- « 


ra _ -o £ 


o. © 
tr o 


o © -x £ 


© TO 

> 3 


C5 •- 


-o © 


o 


£ © -o £ © 


© © 
3 

© >>-0 
©ora 
c ra jz 
o 05 o 
o 05 © 
© -X 
•O c ^ 

ra ra o 

LU g 


o 
g 

i ? 
© -= 
OT | 

-O 05 
C © 
O X5 
O 


> X5 
O O 

0.-0 

C 

© © 
^ ra 

I E 

o °- 
g 


CD) 

0 

■o 

C 

3 

0 


0 


3 

cr 

0 

c 

o 


0 

JD 

0 

L_ 

3 

O 


(- W LU 

-V-. r— .r— 


0 
C 

© . 

© 3 
o. b 

w 

O) C 

© o 

5= O 


© 

— 

o 

3 

cn j 


© O 
o — 

m ra 

8 . 2 > 


c - 
o> 

CO 


o 

LU 

o 


c 

0 

JZ 


0 

o 


0 7 = 
0 ^ 


S 0)2 

-J 0 o 


< 

o 

LU 

o 


c 

0 —V 

o = 
it= 0 
c 0 
0)0 

CO O 


o 

0 

CL 

E 


© 

3 

o . ^ 

©^ V) 

0 ra ra 
> 

.. © 

© 


© 


© 

.c 


© 


-O 

” c 




O £ 

| Ilf 

ra 1 E 3 
o © o 

°T3 “ g 
O TD 0 c 

c g 32 

E © E 2 
^ © o to ©. © .© £- to 
3 *- — ^ o x: ra c 

? © 0 - o 
b > © o 


^ E £ 
£ © £ 

o E 2 

sis 

ti © © 
© © © 
• © 
© 
© 


© © 
© o © 

~ 2 3 
£35 

-I 8 

£ C © 

ra o © 
E o ra 
E © rc 

Q £ © 


-o 

© 

> 

© 

Q. 


© 

OT 

■+—• 

C 

© 


© > 
£ < 


© -o 


C T “ 

0 o 


0 . 
0 

L. 

© © 

C g 
© o 


c 
o >- 

O 0 - 


*- C U) 


© © 

> -■ 

c 


O w £ 


8 


c * 

O i- 
-x= © 

© X5 

.£* E 

~ ra 


05 

05 

OL 

m 

z 


o 

o 

□l 

CD 


5-62 











& 

cn = 

£ £5 

I C 

O Q- 

E © 

S CD 

x 


O 

_1 

CO 

o 

•D 

c 

© 

O 

CC 

LU 

LL 


cd 

t o 
<*- 
05 C 
O O 
C = 
CO CO 
O 05 

c • 
g>* 

(D 


O 

LU 

o 

Jl = 

£ o — 
_J © o 


c 

o 

o 


lO 

UJ 

_J 

CD 

< 


c 

o 

« 

c 

CO 

Q. 

X 

UJ 

05 

c 

05 

Q. 

CL 

a 

'!o 

CQ 

.C 


0 ) 


E 

CO 

w 

05 

O 


CT> 

C 


CO 

05 


C/5 

C/5 

05 

C 

3 


O 

O 

■C 


xi 

05 

">N 

CO 

■O 

05 "o 
C 05 
'C N 

o o 
■o o 

XI 
■O 3 
05 CO 


CO O 
05 -= 
W £ 
CO § 
05 g 

.E co 

co 0 
— < 

0 


_q i2 .E 


0 

■o 

o 

a> 

Q. 

cd 

c 


c 

o 


o 

3 


CD 


0 


is c 


c o 

CO c 
♦Z 0 


0 .b= 


CD 

c 


*0 

c 


0 


° 05 
CO 05 

O CD 

05 co 
12 C 
CO 
05 


3 

■o 

co 

>* 

CO 

5 

05 

> 


O ~ 


05 


3 

T3 „ 
05 CO 


CO 

k_ 

= 05 
Co Q_ 

O O 
“ 05 

■o C 
O z 

.E o 


co 

c 

o 

CD 

■O 

c 

3 

2 

co 

"O 

05 

i_ 

3 

O 

05 

TD 

05 

XD 


© 

c 


CO 

05 

3 

"O 

05 

■C 

CD 

CO 

05 

> 


CO _ 

E 5 


05 

n 

2 

3 

O 


E 
o S 
5 co 


_ 3 

o 

CO — 
CO CL 
05 05 
O O 
O X 
CO 05 


•o 
o 
co 

CO 
CD 
O 
O 
C0 

.E c 

CO 05 

c °- 
~ O 

g .co 

o o 

~ c 

05 05 
XD -t 3 
CO 05 

If * s 

© g 

05 -P 


-- E 

2 to 

E © 

-I 

?i 

o -a 
5 3 
— o 

§ ^ 

E -P 

o 

E co 
o 2 
co 


2 

3 

O 

5 

o 

3= 

co 


C0 


"O 

05 


C-5 £ 
5 co 

CO © 
05 o 
2: o 


X5 $ 


CO CO 
CD 05 

o ;-= 

c •= 
o o 
C CO 


05 -* 

c xi 

CO 05 
— 3 
05 O 

§E 


3 

*o 

0 

0 

0 

O 

O 

0 

0 

X) 

0 

C 

o 

0 

0 

0 

V— 

0 

0 

O 

JZ 

0 

> 

>* 

s CO 
0 0 
CD -^3 

0 ’> 

£ O 

0 0 

*2 C 

§■2 

co 8 

05 i; 

Jo “ 

2 O 

E o 

2 05 

E E 


_ 05 C 

* 8- g 

05 ^ 2 
3 .to 05 
O 

Q5 „ 

CO T3 


T3 

05 


05 


CL 

O 

c 

o 


c 

o 

c 

05 

c 

3 

"O 


o 


>. 

c 

o 

>. 


CO = 


»- O - 


.5 o 

O 3 

o £ 

CO co 


05 
XD 

2 
3 
O 
& 

© © 8 

05 2 05 

CO CCS £ 
Nq 
■X CO “ 

o-E 

g >. © 

05 05 

E « 


co 

(0 

05 g 

I I 

c 

I I 

C 2 

C T5 
05 
05 = 

•i 2 

3 CO 

•O Q. 


c 

05 

E 

Q. 

'3 

cr 

05 

> 

C0 

05 


O 

c -O 

05 C 

■E co 


o 

•O 

05 

c 

o 

2 

o 

o 


"O 

05 

1 _ 

CD 

> 

O 

o 

05 

XD 


3 

O 

5 

05 ic 
XI 3 
O O 
c ^ 

2 05 

■*-* C 

c 2 

05 

CL § 
O § 


CO 

O 

Q. 

>> 


3 "O 
C 


E c xi 
Soc 

C co 2 

i5 .E 5 

o. E c ' 
„ E o 


co 
"o E 


co 


05 


05 

-o 

05 

XD 

2 

3 

O 


CO 

L_ 

0 

CL 

T3 . 
8 § 
« § 

TO £ 

05 00 


C CD 

E E 

I » 

CO ^ 

c E 

^ .55 
o £ 


■a 

05 

n co 

1 £ 

'8 8 
a. o 

CO o 

03 -a 
05 CO 

> o 

CO >- 

05 
N 


o CO 


£ ~ a. c -p 


co 


05 


CO CD 
£ .£ O 
ob r 
it: © 3 
CO -Q o 
i= -o © 

8 8° 
0 5 2 


c o 
o 0 c 

© = o 
o .2 
h 0 X 


CO © S 
*- T3 Z 

“ C CD 

I 8 

CL ” 
C 05 © 

CD XI © 

E •— S 
© . > 
CL CO < 

E 

O CX5 

2 cr '~ 

3 

Si 
■§■<3 

m *5 


■D 
C 
CO 
w 
c 
o 

CD O 
CD 

© C 

£ -2 co 


>* © 

© 2 

■a o 

2 8 

§ © 
o w 

O ©5 
© 2 


fl 

CD r- 

§ 3 


8 © 


in 


CD © 

a. © 
Q. 8 
0 u. 


0 
0 5 = 
O o 
o 

0 0 


0 
_ o 
p 0 75 


> o 


3 
0 
0 

f E 


0 

Q. 


0 *5 

w ^ 

E « 

2 .05 

3 © 

o © 

§ -o 

© 5 
ra 2 
CD o 


© o 
0 -o 

3 

0 o 

2 i 

o •= 

© 

© CD 

■o 

° C 

CD © 

Q.Z 


T) >0 
C CD © 

© © © 
0 > 
© 05 = 
C o 
.05 © CO 

w I © 
© E ^ 

© CO o 
cd i2 5 

Eg© 

xi 5 

05 w © 
3 CD 
O >- 
E o 

E o g 

© © "o 
© © . 
!= © © 
© 0 © 

© © j= 

xi © E 

i|S 

3 E © 
2 © £ 
© E © 
0 '© o 

Ilf 

© E z 

3 £ ^ 

2 © g 

3 2 r 
c 0 0 
0 3 > 


>N 0 

0 

*o 


0 

O 


o 
0 
Q. 

E 0 

— 

® O S 

05^ CO 
030 

© § CM 
© 8 C 
£ © 
© © E 

-o g £ 

© CD O 

2 05 E 

o E o 

i • c 

> >>-s 
c © S 
o ■© E 

'■5 © 2 

3 CL 3 


S5E I 

8 E § 
o in .2 
■000 

^ -Q o 

0 0 P 
0 -s — 

r- 0 C 

fc C 0 
~ .E > 
0 0 * 0 > 
C 0 ^ 

O c c 
>* co ra 
c *- 
© © © 


05 


<V 

CD' 


© 

05 


© O 
o ~ 

5 « 

05 


05 

W 


< 

O 

LU 

o 


c 

co ^ 
0 = 
E co 
c w 
05 2 
CD O 


o 

© 

o. 

E 


o 

CD > 
© 3 

13 

SI 
c £ 
= E 

CD E 
3 — 
© 
k_ 

05 


CO 
W © 
05 LU 

g 


-O 

c 

© 

T3 

© 

O 

CC 


05 

CD 


W 

O g 

O w 


c 

3 

X -o 
© - © 
>k >> o 

© © X 


© 

.E 5 o 

X X 


c <0 

O I- 
= CD 
CO XU 

.E 5 E 

■— 3 


o 

o 

1- -O 

I’l 


X 

CD 


5-63 











p 

o 

o 


m 

LU 

_l 

CD 

< 


o 

Si. 

O 

k. 

CL 

C 

o 

« 

c 

(0 

a 

x 

LU 

a> 

c 

a5 

ql 

x 

CO 

'to 

CD 

.n 

k_ 

o 

z 

a> 


E 

CO 

k_ 

o> 

o 


CT> 

c 


c 

o 

(0 

CT) 


0) = 
£ -a 

1 c 

o ©• 
.2 co 
«> CD 
CC 


® 

p o 
<n 
ffl P 

o o 

P = 

co co 
g g> 

Is 

CO 


0 

O) 


CD 

L_ 

o 

ffl 

m C 

8.2 

si 

2 = 

1 1 
OT 

CO 


O 

P 

Q. 

E 


C <0 

O k_ 
■= ® 
ffl X5 

.2> E 

~ 3 


P 

c 

p 

d 

_i 

CO 

o 

d 

X ^ 
LU -I 
LL CD 


< 

a 

LU 

O 


Ms 

£ o — 

8 coiS 
J «U 


P 

c 

_ co 

« co © 

sbj 

&£ S 

CD UL P 
c! CD " 
3 -P 
CO ~ 

© CO 
ffi 
o 

§ 2 

§® 

© <= 

_ © 

CO o 05 

oH £ 

3 — ~ 

« s To 


£ 

® 

CO 

CD 

£ 

g 

o 

4—> 

CO 

X 


CO 

CD 


CO 

c 

o 

a. k. 
0 0 
0 


0 

0 

L_ 

3 

0 

0 

0 


14- O 

O £ 

C ^ 

.2 0 B 
c 

3 


0 


0 

-2 'o' ^ 

® k. ® 

qA £ 

E T3 
o © a) 

° o E 

TJ an 

1 2 CO 
§ 0 - 0 ) 
^ cd it; 

CO O £ 

j= w o 

tC ® CL 
O ® CO 

z ca 2 


O s = 


® .2. 


^ O O 

O ii c" CO 
■*: (0 £ TJ 
P P © ffl 
O) O k. o 
itt ° O l_ 
c - - CO 

-2 >, ffl © 

Ilfs 

O O co 


CL O 

C 2 

2 co 


£ To 


® 

3 £ 
O) CD 

E ffl 

o>< 
.5 O 

p LU 

® o 

E cd 
cd p 

— 4- 

cl 

15 

co C 

.t; 3 


CO P 
. ffl 

o> > 
.2 2 
t;,, oia 
p ^ p c 

m —- -k* P 

E co co T 
g = ® 
^'oi co n 

o 

*4— LJ 

O CD CD 2 

_ CO CO ° 

If^l 

IS.S5 

CD P co" 2 

E p .2 8 

.2 -5 = ffl 

q- y o ® 
co 


g § 

p cm 
c tr 
® o 

CO Q_ 

E ® 
a. cc 

5 | 

2 p 
co p 

if © 

- 1 - P 
a) 13 
< 
P 

o 

CO 


p 

CO 

P 

’c 

k_ 

o 

p 

O 

® 

jp 


P 

p 

CO 


CD 

ffl £ 

p 2 

— p 

o ® 

— P 

co "5 

t < 

o c 

CL O 
a) co 


CO 




■E 

ffl 



O 

p 


0 

Q. 

0 

X 

p p" 

0 

O 

0 p 
cn CL 

4Z 

L_ 

X 

X 


a; 

E 


a. 

o 


3 

■a 

c 

CD 


co o 

ffl >2 C 

= g ° 

CO CO 2 
CD .co co 
§ .8 W 
o ^ ® 
Z O £ 


c 

CD 

E 
E 

P 8 

§5? 

co CD 

2E 

isi 

co 
> 
LU 

>. _ 

p 2 
CO £ 

CO "O 
® p 

co 


a. 

o. 

CO 

co 

CO 

c" 

ra 

a. 

c 

o 


ffl O 

I 5 ® 

c 3 
8 « 
CC LU 

II 

CO T3 

I§ 

o o 
CO* §■ 
^CC 

LL >. 

p ^ 
CO 3 

CO co 
.2 ~o 
c 


0 

_ 0 

^ 0 cc 

O £ > 

wSz 

O = ffl 

CD 2 O 
■P 5 S3 

i s° 

CO ^CO 
LJ ^ 
.ffl LL 
P Cl) 


co a> 

■c p 
o p ~ 

£ 8- | 

>E | 

8 CO 8 
C CO h 
CD 


CO 


o 

cc 

LU _ 
LL CL 


3 

CO 

co _ 

8 8 

3 .2 

o .-tr 

CO 13 
CD 13 

Jl CO _ 
CO >s CO 

k- r“ 

3 5 -O 

■4—» v -« ^ 

3 13 CO 
OP . 
CO CO 
CO ^ 

CO o 
CD 


CO 

CO 

CO 

CD 

o 

CD 

p 

>. 

p 


CO 

P 

o 


■ -O 
13 


CL 

CD 


CO CO 
CD 


CO 


,c0 CD 
CO 
CD 

.P 
■C 
O 


CO 


CO 


co 5 
ca 2 

#1 
o > 
Z O 


CD <D P 
£ -c p 

co 

1 ° g 

s-lS 

= O CD 

CO rr, ~ 
ffl-2 

p ^ cl p >;.. 

m 2 £ 2 2 
cL-r £ 5 

co ki co a 


CD 

.c o 
p •= 

O CO CD 

Z O £ 


O p 
.03 

cd" co to 
-.2 E ffl 


CD 


^ ® co¬ 
co 2 P 
a) ° £ 
r 0) a 
^ P -o 
il'a. « 

O p co 
0- 

X CL O 
CD ca §- 

ffl CO -- 

^ 0 >> 
-.0 

o|l 

OT > W 
P ^ CO 
CD CO ffl 

E o 2 

£ -9 3 

8 ° ° 
cd d 2 
£ S P 

CO LL 3 
ffl CD ^ 

«e 3 

ioi 

Z CD - 


Is 

co o o 

ffl c 3 

2 O A= 

C 

§ 8.8 

^ .2 « 

p p p 


p 

p 

p 
CD 
13 

k_ 

P 3 
CO o 


ffl 

P 


P 

o 


3 O 


O) 

p 


co 
g 
p P 


P 


!o s 

p CD =* 

co £ .2 

5 

o £ ca 
q. 13 CD 
a. cd 


CD 

CL 

o 

L_ 

CL 

o 


p £ 


p ffl 
•a cl 
p ffl 
P Q. 
2 co 

> p 
ffl ro 

> Q. 

cd ir 

>- p 

gs 

of 

ffl Q. 
ffl 


P 

O 


O .. 
c -O 

E S 

ffl o 

.® ^ 
o ffl 

CL E 


O .co 
To ip 
X ~ 


p 

o 


o 

p 

3 

o 

O 


c ^ 
ffl 2 
£ 8 
E T3 
o 0) 
o O 
O ® 

^ To 
o — 

2 
> 
p 
< 
ffl 
-P 


E ^ 

CD 
co 


3 
P 
O ffl 
Q. > 
CLP 
O ffl 


P 

ffl 

4—* 

P 

„ ffl 

p E 
£ ® 
o> Q- 
c E 

P CD 

5 p 

p >> 

— 0 

.2. E 

iS w 

CD ffl 

k_ 

£ 3 
P co 

O P 
Z © 

p p 
CO c CD 

.2 c ffl 
= 22 
g p |_ 

c <3> 

x :•= >> 

LJ CO _ 

•p P 2 

o p 2 
o 

o c 2 

© cd To 

i5£ § 

® 8 8 
-P. V-. 


.= § .§ ~ ^ 


< 

o 

LU 

o 


p 

ffl 

2 — 
it= co 
p co 
o> P 

CO O 


p 

o 


£ '•= o 

o _ 

CD P 

3 = 2 

CD P 
ffl 2 

0 .5? 


0 


0 


I ffl 

ffl p 


o 

< 

p 

o 

To 

£ 

cd 

CO 


g o 

p p 
ffl o 

o To 
X Z 


5 

CD CD 
P O 


O- o 

i| 

O X 


CM 

° ” 

x i 
m x 
z < 


5-64 
















c 

o 

o 


in 

HI 

_i 

CD 

< 


C 

o 

in 

c 

(0 

Q. 

X 

HI 

© 

_C 

© 

Q. 

a 

JS, 

TO 

CO 


© 

JZ 


E 

ra 

i- 

a> 

o 

i_ 

0 . 

05 

C 


c 

o 

a 

05 


>. 
05 = 

E s 

s'g 

1 » 
S CD 

cc 


© 


© C 

££ 
CD CD 
O 05 


C ' 
05 * 

W 


CD 

05 


© 

1 — 

O 

© “- 

“ c 
0 o 
o ~ 

E ra 

g “ 

e i 

05 

CO 


o 

CD 

Q. 

E 


C O 
O J- 
= CD 
CD -O 

.2> E 

- o 


o 

c 

CD 

d 

_l 

CO 

o 

d 

cc s 

HI -I 
H CO 


< 

O 

HI 

o 


CD 


© 

in 


g 05* 

' w O 


© 

"O 

© 

c £ 

I o 

to ^ 

« (0 
c c 
CO o 
c '« 
o .© 

■o E 
© © 
W CD 
© £ 

°S 

CD CD 
■° >> 
2 c 
o o 

o C/5 

l! 

CD 

E S 
a. 05 

If 

I S 

15 

05 W 

5 © 

O CD 

O £5 


05 

I s 

© o 

05 05 
© 05 


^ ° o 

© -9 
^ E 

T3 c 
0 > E 

N £ 

E 05 

c 3 

c * 
c -O 


■O u ' 

3 © 

o £ 

© 5 

i ^ 

05 O 

c 

© = 

© 0 
F -Q 


© 

!o 

o 

E 

> 

o 

c 

© 

05 

< 

c 

o 

o 

© 

o 

l_ 

Q_ 

£ 

c 

© 

E 

c 

o 

> 

c 

HI 

CO 

d 

© 


tc 

© 

F o _ 

^ 05 O 


o 

©• 

© 


05 O) 
© C 
05 © 


>< 

.Q 

"O 

© 


f E 

_ a I 

Pd .2 

•EP^ 

sli 

Si i 

■*“' C "O 
05 © © 

.S E O. 

T3 Q. Q. 

2 0 3 
o cr ct 

C CD © 

W C g 

c 0-0 

■2 tS 2 

« 2 § 

§>£ 5 

2 8? 
c X © 
.2 ^ © 
© i= © 
.« »- c 
£ °b 
© © E 

© o ® 

02 CD 

o w 

o 10 .2 

© CO o 


5 § 


0 
c n 
3 

*o 2 

£•5 

is Z 

L - 

'o 0 

££ 

"O 


05 

C 


. - >N 


J. s 

« C 


>.2 

12 
o © 
© £ 

i © 

o E 
<-> © 
.2 Q. 

•- i 

© ^ 


o 

o 


© - 

t: E 

© Q. 

If 

O © 
0 2 

« 3 
© £ 
o 05 

25 8 

3,-a 

c 

c © 

2 M 

E 05 

9 . o 
o c 

O" © 
© > 


© 


c 

o 5 
o > 
w ra 

§€ 

3 o 

© z 

« 

.2 c 

■0 o 

15 

o . 

> ^5 
© 

© 5 
£ © 


© 

'« 

© 

o 

Q. 

w 

© 

> 

© 

C 

© 


© 

o ® 
O tn 

Q. 

52 "0 

H- © 

C .5= 

© T3 

E c 

Q.~ 
'o o 
cr c 


H- © 


© 

5 

o 

Q. 

© 

W 


© 

« 

© 


3 

W 


■O 

c 

© 


© 

-5C 

o 

5 


O O 


c 

© 

E 

9 . 

‘o 

O' 

© 

© 

w 


~ CD 


C © 

O .C 

3 § 

3 2 = 

O 

CO — 

C 3 
O JZ 
O CO 

P -o ^ 


0 

0 

0 

0 

o 

c 


0 

E 

CO 

c 


TD 

0 


= 0 


0 
O 

9-c 

o 0 
58 c 
2 - 5 

2 E 

© -Q 

2 o 
© 


05 

c 

© 

Q. 

E 

© 

© 

c 

05 

c 

© 


•O 
© 

2 © 
T5 . . 

© "E" 
o o 
CD = 

w E 

E © 

O Q. 
© 2 
cr « 


0 

n 

‘0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

Q. 


T3 0 
0 

P O 
i5 3 
0 ^ 

1 ? 


0 C ^3 


E 5 


0 


0 


0 

i= x: 

S 0 

-z: 0 


■o 

o 

o 

c 


w 

c 

o _ 

O CD 

© E 

O Q. 


•O 

c 

ra 


CC 

< 

co" 

0 . 

CD 


■O 

© 


w 

© 

3 

© 

© 

© 

E 

c 

o 

© 

05 

i 

© 


© ^ 


o 

k_ 

Q_ 


© 


© 


3 


3 

O' 

© 


O 

© 

© c\l 
©2 
cd CC 
CO < 


< 

O 

HI 

o 

•4-^ 

C 

0 —v 

O = 
it= 0 
c 2 
g> 0 
CO o 


0 


■Q 

c 

3 = 
O 

‘ "O 
0 C 0 ^ 

E 2 • 


0 

C 

o 

*0 


_ c 


.tr -id CO 


.tr c 
E .2 


0 


0 _ 

0 0 D 


o — 


0 O 
m "O 


0 

E 

CD © 

E 

v— 
0 


05 © © 
•O T3 > 
= 3 © 

O O 5< 

§ .2 © 


© w 
© o 

Q. C 
O © 


© _ 
•jg O 

II 

® o 
© ^ 
© n 

© w 
© 3 
JZ -O 

>« ® 

II 
0 •“ 
5)2 

© 0 

05 5 


© CD 

2 2 

© E 

E 2 

© 

© o 
w c 

Ee 

t- c 


c © 

g 0 

CL 0 
3 0 

.2 E 

■o © 


c o 

2 © 
E *- 
9.0 
o 3 
o- o 
© o 


c 

© .2 
£ 3 

•- 2 
>. 05 

If 

ct.E 

,i= © 

© 9 . 

c ’CL 

11 

O •ST' 

8 . .2 

E j* 


CO 

0 ^ 

ol i 

CD CD 
Z < 


05 

c 


C "o 

o 2 

E 3 

O CJ- 
© 


< 

O 

HI 

o 
c c 

1.2 

© 7 = 

© E. 

© C© ; 
—l ’© : 


© 

CD 03 


> £ o i= .2 


co © © 


5 

o 


ra 
© 
o ■= 
■E c 
c .2 


© 
o 
c 
© © 


■O 

© 

© O 
o I 
© O 


o 
w 
© 

_ 05 

SI 

CL 2 
O ^ 


« ? 0 


3 Q 

■o 


© o) i 
CD ■*— O 
— CO 

= © o 

0 3° 
© = T3 
O ~ 
Q. 


© 


■o 
© 

© 

a|g 

|«2 

o o 


i: C 
© © 
E §■ 

o £ 
ra ~ 

Q. © 
© £5 

11 

g. 5 

Q. 05 
05 

OO© 
3 2= ® 
O _ 
o 


c .9 

I. ® 
> 0 

C 0 

o 2 

0 o 
> c 


> — 

c ^ 

© O) 

-x © 
— c 
2 © 

3 c 
o -= 

5 05 

T3 £ 

c = 

© O 
_ « 
o © 
© *- 

2.1 

^ © 
© Q_ 


© 


W M 

c c 
2 0 
05 05 

<n <n 

E E 

© © 


o © 
m >- 
© ® 

« w 
© © 

w £ 

© H 

. -3 ‘#-v 

8 ® r 5 05 

8 S o O C 

O cc: © C .2 

s 2 E o g 

o S. ® © E 

o o = © © 


< 

O 

HI 

o 

fl 

£ .2 

© 

© 

0 " 
-J ’0 = 


O) 3 
O 


o 


© 


Q. « 
>.® 

» E5 


05 C 

si 

0 


0 
C 

0 _ 
O) O) 
n © 


|d 


o 

c I 
o 0 


ra c 

Sg 

■O © 
05 2 

g E 
2 o 
o 

© 

£5 O 


-o 
© E 
5 « 

0 c 

© 

2 E 


© 3 
in cr 
3 © 

© c 
© o 
c = 

o> 2 © 

C C 05 

® w u 

« c c 
© o © 

05 O > 


©■ 

o 

51 

CD 


in 

o 

I 

in 


















c 

o 

o 


UJ 

_l 

CD 

< 

I- 


C 

o 

'55 

c 

03 

a 

x 

UJ 

© 

C 

© 

CL 

a. 

© 

'oj 

CQ 


o 

Z 

© 

JC 


E 

03 

k- 

O) 

O 


03 

C 


c 

o 

© 

03 


2* 
03 = 

E -Q 

1 g 

B <o 

2 <D 

ac 


Q3 

b o 
<^- 
© c 
o o 
c = 
as to 

O 03 
'tz 

§3^ 

co 


03 

03 


a) 

L_ 

O 

© 

CD' 


0) o 
o ~ 

m © 

8 f 

1 ^ 
03 

tt> 


o 

03 

CL 

E 


c « 
o *- 

= Q) 
03 xd 

.E 5 E 

o 


O 

_j 

CO 

o 

•o 

c 

03 

o 

cc 

LU 


< 

a 

LU 

o 


c 

03 


C 

= 03 = 
£ .2 - 


co E w 

S 03© 
_J w O 


•= 2 "a o 

- 03 
0) p 

co R 
03 O 


s ^ 

0 a) 
3 > 


o 

Q. 

03 

> 

CD 

-Q 


"O 

d) 

c 

o> 

0 

CD 

"O 

CD 

-Q 


^ O 


CO 


CD 


i: ^ CD 

CO ~ ^ 03 


3 

O 

£ 

CO 

JX. 

c 

0 

c 

2 

o 

o 

o 

0 

CD 

■4—> 

CO 

CD 

xi 


"O 

Q) 

C 

03 

W 

03 

O 

0) 

X3 

g 

o 

o 


© 03 

"© T/j 
c c 

CO 03 


■o 

03 

03 

O CO 

O g 

Sf 

11 
ll 
IS 


c 
2 

•*f£„ 


Q. 

a. 

© 3 

to <u 

©£ 
s >, 

03 -Q 

£ -a 

H 03 


CD 

Jj£ 

c 

CO 

■4-^ 

-Si 

co Ql <o 

C/3 C 
C CO 
03 J= 


♦5 C/3 


a> 


03 03 

c .a 


■a ^ 

03 2 
C/3 > 
CO p 
CD C 
03 2 

>- o 

£ 73 

© ° 

^ © 
o -<= 

o ^ 

L_ * 

O c 
2 CO 
.2 o 
c 73 
© ° 
o ® 
Q.S 


= c 
03 
© 'c/3 
xi © 

I— "O 

co E 

c * 
0 © 

f - CD 
03 ^ 

s § 

O O 
0 jz 


CD 
£ 

CO 

c 

CO 

■+-* 

0 
03 
CO 

L_ 

o 

GO 

x: 
o 
CO 
0 

o 

C - 
— CL 

o 

3 


0 
CL 

0 E 
c o 

0 O 
Q 
03 -Q 

c TO 


0 
i- 

o 

Q.= -to 
© k. C 

> O © 

|g| 

2 © o 

% © © 
O £ £ 


© © 
© '© 

© m 
C £ 
© -C 

.1-5 
© 

E c 
© .2 

= b 
o o 
o ro 


S g 

3 O 
O = 
O 
© 


c 

© 


© 
C/3 
CL C 
^ © CD 

c ~ a. 
© £ <s) 


- o 


5 

2 c 

, -s © 
O CO 

3 .2 O 
c ~ 

© 

© 
o 

c 
o 


c _l 
i CO 

i o 


© 


o I- P © ^ 


O ■<- 

S o' 


§ © 
E c 


g'i 


f I 

R co 

O c 

o § 

© ■“ 
© © 
© 03 
© © 


52 5 © £ 

© s 

03 ^ 


© 

> 

w © 

O 2 
o © 


© 

JD 


o (j> 

■o 2 


~o £ ^ £ 


© o 


© 


© 


w 


© 


.2- m 
T3 
© c 

-Q © 


2 2 
3 

O O 
© £ 


o 
© 
w 
o 
o 
© 

03 O CD 

~ E o 

'2 g.z 


■e kj 

R 

CL o 
W o 

10 o 

E JO 
© r= 

■B © 

© O 

E2 
- o 

O CL 

.2. S © 


© 03 © 

2 © 2 
C (rt 0 
0 0 0 

© 2 2 
© . 
*- c © 
= © .2 
© o © 
O "O c 
.2 o © 


^ g QC 
LU 


© 


C3 


w E <o 

0 0 _ 

CL •— 
0 ° Q_ 

i m 0 
© © _ 
ro © o 
*© © © 

iMl 


2 g. 

■4—* 

3 "O 
© C 
C © 

Q- § 
W B 

—‘ CO 

c .E 
© -o 
E 5 
2- o 

3 O 
O' >- 
© © 


■O 


© f= l: 


ro _ 

© © 
m © 

2 -R 

O o 
To 2 


© 

Q. J±J C 
© C © 

“■ E to 
g © © 

R CL-O 
§ p o 
5 .2 © 


o 

c 

o 

CL 

w 

© 


© 

l _ 

© 
CL 

o 
© 
£ O 
o © 

*- JD 
C — 
© « 

°-2 
© Q. 
S CL 
ro; © 

" E ro 

-© 5 
© a 


= 82® 


2 ^ 2 § w 


© o 
'© ^ 

E CD 
o © 
Z £ 


< 

O 

UJ 

o 

c 

© 

o = 
!t= w 

c 2 
03 © 

co O 


|o 
2 © To 


— OT 
© © 


c 
0 

it! §. 


0 


o ^ 

0 > r 
^ _Q .E 

4—• , 

C O) — 

2 O R -8 

C 5 ^ m 
°~p2 

© © 3 '© 

£ x O 3= 

t— © C3 O 


« 

-o © 

© 1 
§ E 
2^ 

< g 

© R 

£i 

o © 
c 5 
.2 To 
a. E 

O © u 

■o ro 

< < .E 


ro 


m 

o 

q! 

CD 


■o 

c 

© 

d 

_i 

CO 

o 

d 

cc ^ 

LU -I 
LL CD 


< 

O 

UJ 

o 


© 


p 


© 


co 'ro to 

© 03 © 

- w O 


■o 

© 

© 

C3 

£ 2 

o °- 
jd g 

© 3 

■° | 

o > 

8.2 

5 a 

W 3 

0 -b 

Z= 0 

1 o 
o o 
© © 
c .E 
O © 

o .Q. 

2 Q- 

It 
8 & 

6 E 
5 © 
o 
© 

© ^ 


_ CD 

2 E 

3 = 0 

o » 2 
> -E. © 

& 03 ror 

c ^ o 

r— 


03 


© 


3 iB'S 

© ro © 

"O'©© 

E ©>9 

« c Q 

3 1 
2-0° 

>- .2 ~o 
© w © 
Q. © B 
© -° E 

= T3 = 
E ® © 
■’“ © - 0 
ro- © ■© 

5 C ro 


« 


© © 


S 03 c © 

c c © © 


03 C 

© o 

© "O 
> © 
© 


© 

E © 
lls 
3 = 1 

w 5 

c ic © 
~ o © 
c n = 
.2>-o > 
X c t3 

© * « 
° 

Ilf 

O 0 

"2 © 3 
© 

-= © 
© in ^ 

C © r- 
© ■*"' . 
O .2 © 

©wo 
t8 = 
© ■© © 
E ^ 


CNJ 

0 

©a 

Si 
2 © 
o x: 
■o Z 
© © 

2 « 
— j*; 
© © 
*- © 

o ^ 
■O «M 
© O 

o — 

*“ CL 
© 3 
© ■© 

© © 
3? 03 
© .2 
© w 
> © 
© — 
© O 


(TO © 

E 03 © 

>. c -= 
ro © 

2 © — 

ro -© 

© ■— 


© 

Q. 


3 S E 

o >< c 
O a© 
3 E >• 
| 8 § 
©2<§ 
= O © 

>52 
T3 © 2 
© © © 
© co 

£ x: CC 

— -c © 

O O XI 
.t; c 


ro o 
w © 


5? o o 


_ o c 

— © O 
© X3 O 


— o E 

© ■£,< 
© >» 

>, 1- co 

= O CT3 
© ■*- C 


© 


f. o 
co « 

03 >, 

^ c © _ 

rof © § © fo © 

© W XI ro E w 

> O 03 

X o 


, C 3 

1 © o 

03X1 


« -o 
© © 
c E © 

3 ®i 

o w ^ 

i© 1 E 

Q. E c 
§-© © 
Q. © O 


< 

o 

LU 

o 


c 

© —- 
2 — 
it= w 
c w 

03 © 

co o 


c 

ro 

© 

o 

c 

© 

*c 

© 


© 

© 

b 
© 

E _ 

-— « 9- 

2 O ® ro 

S o g - 5 
.E © 3 c 

«£ 8 .e 
© 

3 

g 
> 

b 


© 

© 


o © © 
>>•2 


© w 
© 


"e ’> 2 
2 tj 
> © 


CD 

o 

51 

CD 


c 

W — 


© 


yjj 

©S |£ 

if 

8 J g § 

.©, g c © 

© S o ° 
m .© B =5 . 

XI Q. ©. CL G) 

tr © .2 1 © x 

o § •■= w UJ 
Z o c .t; X 


< 

O 

LU 

o 

ll 

i .2 


© c © 

8 §>J2 
_j © O 


— © 
© © 

I ® 

g o) 
'© « 
© 5 


TD 

© 


.2 C 


© . 


© 
o 
c 
© © 

S.I 


© 


c 

o .2 

E £ 

8 o 
O 5 

g ro 

R © 

o co 

© # 

IS 

2 co 
5 © 
o © 
m © 


o 

c _ _ 

0) 5= o 

JD 2 'ro 

_pro 

73 ro ° 

|l| 

5 2 5 

© ro o 

© °--a 
R 2 5 
© R - 

■g § n 
'0 ^ 

2 .©. 

© 

© £ c 

3.1 5 . 

i -o i 

> c ■© 

© © © 

1 © 2 

2 -2 cd 

XD ’© ^ 

ro © 2 

© o o 
•p CL CL 

° s o 

c © § 

© o 2 

a; 8 ®b 

= © c © 
£ £ o c 


< 

O 

LU 

o 


c 

© -TO 
2 — 
b © 

c 2 
03 © 

w o 


->-03 
© © br W 
ro P © © 

x o 2 > 

h -C r 

© Clli O 

© © ro = 

cOx® 
© — co 
> LU -D 

cE © 8 
§"£© 
1 S = E 

o Q3 © O 

co O cn O 


c 

© 

o 

c 

03 

'© 

© 


— o 

3 © 
© 2 - 

2 .i 

"O © 

3 .© 
O O 
o c 


O 

CL 

m 


5-66 


















__ Mitigation Monitoring Program for the North Baja Pipeline Expansion Project _ 

Mitigation Significance Before Significance After Monitoring 

Number a _ Impact b _ Mitigation b,c Mitigation Measure b Mitigation bc Responsibility 

RELIABILITY AND SAFETY 


CD 

W 

TJ ® 
a) £ 

'€ ~ 

© $ 
o > 

CO 0 

'© 5 
cq ® 

XC Q. 

! i 

Z o 


>2 
ra 
© 

"o © 
c © £ 

* ~ o 

C C -~ 

g © 5 

o -o _ 

i= ■§ o b 
</> £ — — 

o 2 
o co 


O © 
c £ 


CO 

c 

o 

N 


■2 a) 
o) a< 


co 

.2 w 

a. CD 
ClLU 
CO LL 


2E 

E o 

2 © 

CO o 

© s= 

2 ©^ 


© 

.c 

*' c 
■O o 
c = 
CO CO 

>> o 

2 9- 

co o 
co O 


2 @ 
II 

> c 
C © 
.O CO 


8 ® ^ 
c-d) 

e ^e 


^ € 

,® o - 
O > © 


CD 


CO 

CO 

>2 

O 


> 

> CO 


TO 

© 

C 

g> 

co 

© 

■a 

CD 

JD 


© 

■a 

© 

© 

o 

x 


tr 

© 

CL 

DC 

u. 

O 


co n 

^ LJ- C m 


*o 

C 

3 

o 

L_ 

O) 

a) 

> 

o 

.q 

03 

■o 

c 

03 

0 

C 

0 

Q_ 

CL 

0 


C 

o 

0 

c 

03 

CL 

X 

LU 

0 

c 

0 

g. 

Q- 

0 

0 

CQ 

JC 

tr 

o 


0 03 

L_ ^ 
0 © 

0 h- 
E C 

o (f) 

■a* 

CD © 
? 

2 © 

•I 55 

E © 

c « 
© W 

tj 2 
© © 
© 3R 
© 2 
o E 

TJ c 
© .2 
o £ 


co |_ 

80 
o Q 


0 
k_ 

0 

c 

c/3 a> 

|i 

S>.£ 

li 

© O 

co O 

TJ CO 

c © 

© .tr 


o 

© 

2 TJ 
a c _ 

o 

fjsl 
2 8 y 


3 

o 

5 

3 

CL 

0 

*C 


C 0 0 
© ® 
S = 

x: © © 
o •*- 

co © 

f © E 

> O) 

co To 2 

C 

O p 


c 

© 

E 

© 

k_ 

'o 
cr 
© 
i _ 

c 

o> 

w 

© 

TJ 

E 

© 

E 


© 


© 
i _ 

© 

■a 
© 
u. 

2 
-O 

O t © © g 


3 2 


© 


© _ w 

CD C O 
© © 


© © 

£ 05 
o _ 

'■£ O 


F *- > 75 ~ 


Cl 2 
© © 


CL Q- 

£ 2 © 
TJ ■§ 

® © O 


o 
© 

™£! 2 -s = 


’-Du) 
>_ © © 
© a. != 

2 ©| 
0 2 2 


■a 
c x: 
© — 
co 
© tj 

E © 

© N 
x © 
© x - 
o 

« E 
5 2 
© ’© 

c w 
— w 
F w 
o 2 

P: "O 

1° 
CL C 

© Q 
x: w 
*" O 

?8 
2 o 
o 
© 


c -o 

2 i 

XJ © 

© n 
^ o 
w O 
© _ 

© c 


© 

^-S 

E E 
© © 


T3 
© 

t CD 
CO c 
© ~ 
T3 P 

© '© 
X 3 CD 

1 § 
o o 

*1 
0 —' 
•4= 0 

:-= .c 
o 

3 o 


C/3 S 

ifi 

■O © L. 
© 2 2 
t5«0 co 

C ^ 
C F "qj 

© 2 7© 
© CQ -y 
C J 
'CD ° O 

C C X3 
© .05 c 

-= co © 
1^ 
CD 7 O 
O © O 
O 2 CM 
F >^ © 
©2 ® 

S 8 2 

c=§ < 
© © © 


© 
c 
o 

■2 m 
0 2 
T3 2 

c = __ 

© O — 


■O 

© 

w 

© 

© © 
~ CD 

c © 
© V 
© 2 


- P - 

3 2 E 
© ^ 2 
© ® □ 

Q. CD © 


2 2 
< (D 

^ 0 
2 cc 
c © 

5 = 

11 
© Q. 

2 « 
^ © 

p .5 

,§>^ 
c 


4= 2 

o 
2 = 
W Q 

cdCJ 
c © 

© -Cl 

-Q *0 
^ 0 
c 

Q) ^ 

(/> 0 
0 o 

"3, © 

CD X 3 

•is 
© © 
© o 
2 § 

j? © 

© c 

© o 


c 

o 

© 

» 

0 

0 

0 

0 


O 

■e 

2 

I 


© 

©■ c 
O ” 
O o 
CM © 

o'o 

2 a. 


© 
■o 
o 

= o 

® CD 
© 2 
© 2 
2 '© 
CD CQ 

© 2 
© £ 
©i 

o © 
2 O 

to © 
^ x: 

> 0! 
'a o 


"D 

C 

© 

c 

o 

L' 

© 

© 

CL 

o 

c 

© 

c 

© 

E 

2 

CL 

E 

T3 

C 

© 

© 

L_ 

0 

Q. 

0 

— 

CL 

P 

3 

O 

0^ 

0 

CD 

.c 

tr 

o 


0 

♦—> __ 
p ® 

r- k- 
•- © © 

2 2c 

1 Ei 
E -i £ 

2 © o 


© o § 

*- co o 

© £ 2 
3 


i§ 


0 

c 

2 ^ 
£ d 

o 

© 3 

2 o 

« ^ 
It; c 
c © 

E 


c 

o 

L 

O 

0 

CL 

0 — 
C 0 
*— x: 
0 

c 0 
o 


^ 0 ^ 


o 
<0 0 


o 

3 | 
© 2 


© © 

.!= CD 
*♦— 

© 2 
2 i 


c • 2 

© CM aj 
CL 


.c d 2 

*-‘ZZ 
CD 

c 2 

I P 


o © 
u. o 
w 

© £ 
© 05 

©• C - 


o 

E 
o 
E 

I? 
0 © 
- 0 
JZ 

0 ^ 

0 

X3 




0 

JZ 


0 


O r n 

gflS 

© Q. 2 
£ cc cd 
2 LX £ 
2 0 © 


© 


CD . 2 - 
^ 0.2 2 


° © 
c c 
o o 

V-» 

o o 
© © 
a. o. 
w © 
c c 


© _ 
CL O 

« ©• 

o « 
w © 
•o >> 

2 o 

O T- 
-O ^ 

c © 
o > 


© 

I 2 

© x: 

LL 5 
> © 

it 
^8 
« o 

Jr C 
O © 

© O" 

X © 

© 2 
© © 

SI 
© c 
■o © 

1 2 

w w 
o c 
t o 
o *= 

U 2 © 

2 © c 
2 CD o 

© CD -zz 

p s o 
© © 
c t; a 
cd 2 © 
'© c/3 2 


< 

a 

LU 

o 


c 

© -—- 
p = 
2 © 
c © 

O) © 

W O 


© 

!§ 
0 0 
C 0 
^ > 
o o 

§1 

11 

8 - 2 . 
0 .y- 

C CL 

© © 
x: ra 

I— CD 


© © 

.£ 3 

Sj "o 

X3 E © 
3 © © 
CL-g CD 

© © O 

x: T5 

— 75 © 

o o 2 
^ © © 
“ §s 


w 


00 

o 

5 ! 

CD 


5-67 
















& 
o> = 
E -o 

s'S 


o 

CL 

W 

© 

CC 


CD 

P o 

<C.d 

CD C 
O O 
C -^= 

co co 

O 03 

in 


c 

o 

o 


in 

LD 

_I 

m 

< 

I- 


o 

© 

'o 

w 

CL 

c 

o 

'© 

c 

CO 

a 

x 

LU 

CD 

_C 

"55 

o. 

K 

CO 

’© 

GQ 

JZ 


CD 

.c 


E 

CO 

k. 

o> 

o 


o> 

c 


c 

o 

"3 

CO 

03 


CO 

CD 


2 O 
CO i= 
.9 c 
■< 0 - o o 

«.EO 
T3 13 > 
m — E 

— n o 
o o © 

o © g. 
o £ 5 - 

■o © c n 
§£ CO 

•o 2 -g. 

cd .9- 0 5 

1 - Q. 3 

O “■ O 
-to CD )= 
c. sz ■£ 

lie 

CD 

CO © 

— Q_ -Q 

E 2 2 

® X) n 
© CD CD 
© 3 -2 

2 « 2 
.E CD 0 


E ¥ 

b co 

C/> © O 

C c/3 

E 2 O 
2 -i © 

c c 

go 5 o 


CD 


•2 o 
08 2 


. CD P 

2 To 5 

i 1 2 

CD O 
C/3 C _ 
> C (0 
OT E 
CD — 

C CD 


03 © 

© > 
.Q > 

c 

2 sr 

r- co 
w ^ 
CO 
w 


CD 


5 o 
■ a © 
2 S' 
n 3 
o w 
5 -o 

© © 

© p 
tt © 
CO CD 


CO 

© 


© Q. g- 
9- - ? 

Q-2 © 
co >,£ 
C CO o 

i«° 

© © 2 
<- © 
© 3 © 

■c O — 
1— p © 


c 

0 

-1 =6 

Hi 

• -(Ur 

>. © © 
-ST-X © 
© CO © 

© O °- 

-o © 
© © « 
g 

.9 E o 
© •■— 
© >- ~ 
p 03 2 
© 2 o 
03 a o 


~ n 

© o 

•O 
© 

© 
o 
o 


P Q 


CM 

© 
o 
.9 c 
a) o 
o « 
c — 

© -O 

c c 

© © 

.9 C 

© o 

c © 


W 
© 
L_ 

w 13 
9 © 
« 8 


CO 


2 §3 


© 

© 
L— 

CL 

© E 

a. O 
oO 


© 


■O 

© © s 

—■ X c 
© © © 

2 2 © 

© 2 p 

dcB-i 
w § E 

m - c c 

®5i 
9 §.i 

£ 8 © 

T3 — ° 
© "O © 
2 -2 § 
g- 2 CD 
E © 03 
o 0 . 2 
o o 2 


© 

© 

E 

2-0 
^ c 
c © 

»£* 

5 53 
o © 
.9 c 

® © 

0 3 

co b 

2 © 

S CD 

> c 


>3 

CO 

L_ 

X 

CD 

k_ 

CD 

sz 


CD 

c 


3 

CO 1 
CD 


-P. (T» 


0 jr 


.b Q_ 

O) 'q_ 
^ 2 
si 

X © 
2 2 
2 © 
§2 
© w 

© R 

^3 2 
T3 © 
O 33 

Z g 


© 

o 

o 

© 

l— 

Q. 

E 

L_ 

o 

2 

-Q 

'© 

w 

o 

CL 

E 


© 

2 o 

W TD 
P 03 

© •= 
> © 
> CL 
© © 
w >- 

O 03 

o 5 

2 > 

o s 

33 C/3 

•O c 
© .9 
8 © 
©,8 
■° o 

■O © 

3 

o w 
g ■© 

g ® 

O w 

o 5 
© © 

II 

03 © 

■p E 

O 

2 o 

M C 
© o 
o o 


© 

Q. 


O .p 

X3 © 
© JC 
> *- 
5 X3 
© c 
2 © 
“"l 03 
T3 C 
© -J= 
> © 
o o 

Q. 0 

Q_ © 
© > 
© o 

© s 

<n 2 

p a. 

© © 
^ 33 

11 


CD 

^ ? 
o £ 
>- © 
® o 

© © 
© 33 

o *0 
p © 

CD lI 

O CD 
CO Q. 

- CD 
CO »- 

^ ® 
©^ 
"O 

c 


CD 

CD 

o3 

Q. 

‘o. 

CD 


o 

1« 
•|3 

O 

CL CD 

>, E 
5 © 


o 

o © 


C © 


^ © 
o ^ 

11 
o © 

"c 7:3 
o © 
E 2 • 
E 2 


2 *: 

k. 

k_ 

CD 

H 

© 

3 

CD 

0 

0 

3 

O 

© 

CD 

JZ 

© 

c 

'© 

O 



c 

E 

O 

CO 

|— 

"cD 

C 

© 

0 

0 

> 

CD 

CD 

"O 

c 

CD 

© 

Q. 

CL 

p 

p 

0 

z 

O 

Q 

© 

c 

a> 

"cD 

> 

© 

Cl 

© 

V— 

CL 

© 

O 

CO 

T-l 

© 

k. 

-C 

Q. 

O 

JO 


© 

p 

c 

o 

w 

© 

o C/3 

g ^ 
© 

© > 
C 3 
© 0 
c p 
© c 


© 


3 

o 

g 


o © 

O CO 5 

2> E 
R © 
8 .® 

C/3 >* 

~ © 


p 

3 

o 

g 

.9. 

’© 

CO 

.c 

•c 

o 


© i: 

O M— 

J= o 

'© © 
>- o 


P — T, 


■O = 
© 

© 
o 
o 


TO 2 

03 -Q 

© T3 
© 3 

Q. O 

2 I 


>' < M 

©22 
3 0© 

© © c 

> "© © 
© TO — 

^ 03 2 

2 .9 — 

3 P © 

© o .9- 

g o Q. 


*- CL 
©' © 
© s 

£ o 
© — 

9 ~ 

JO 

■c 2 

03 Q. 
'© © 
P- JC 

9 C 
© © 
= © 


I 5 

| 8 
E g 
£ ■§ 
~ o 

o 8 
© © 

o . 

1 O 
> © 
O 03 

Q. 03 

■O E 

3 © 

g c 
g © 


O c/3 

tc © 
ra .9 
£ 

T3 03 

3 « 

O L_ 0 

5 © 8 

.2.9 03 
© 03 © 

m c ' 

J= o 

p - 

0 5 

7 o 


© w 

03 © 

R © 


© 

© 

Q. 

Q. 


o 
w 

2 o 


© 

J3 

H 


© 

s'lf 

“ o 'Q- 

03 © © 

2 T3 2 
.9 c 
© © 


c 

o 

V—> 
CD 

o 

o 

■O 

c 

o 

a) 


o c 


b CD 
O TD 

c 

3 


CD 

CO u 
_ C C 
O © © 

c w © 
o © .— 

E^5 

1 

(D t_ —j 

^ 0 o 
Q- a) 2 

.2 © 2 
© E 
■2 W ? 

■| © © 
2 2^ 
w © c 

© o 
W Si T3 
© Q. © 
2 p © 

O gl 

sn 

o © o 
O © 0 

>,0° 2 
c' _ -a 

! o I 

5- z . i 
© « <_ 
p p © 

■*—» r— 

= 2 c 

i §e 


>* 

o 

c 

CD 

CD 

k. 

CD 

E 

CD 

"O 

c 

CD 

CO 

c 

CD 

E 

p 

© 

CL 

© 

■O 

© 

o 

o 

Q. 

"© • 
>- c/3 
cs: 03 

© 2 


ns 

8 § 

© O) 

o © 

s§ 

(D E 


CD 

o 

© 

m c 

8 .2 
s « 

S .j? 

1 ^ 

03 

CO 


o 

© 

CL 


C ra 

o >- 

•t: © 
© J3 

. 2 > E 

~ 3 


co 

o 

CL 

CO 


5-68 











c 

o 

o 


m 

LU 

CD 

< 


c 

o 

*05 

c 

ra 

x 

X 

HI 

(V 

c 

® 

Q. 

CL 

.52. 

"ra* 

m 

.c 


a> 


E 

ro 

w 

05 

O 


05 

c 


c 

o 

•4-1 

© 

05 


05 = 

.© -o 

o ® 

-*-* L_ 

C O 
O CL 
.9 05 

S as 

a: 


05 

e o 
<* 

05 C 
O O 
C = 
CO (0 
O 05 

C '■ 
05* 

CO 


(0 

05 


05 

i_ 

o 

05 

CD ' 


05 o 
O ~ 

£ © 

8 


c ■ 

05 


CO 


o 

CO 

a. 

E 


c « 

o >- 

= Q5 

co x 
.£> E 
■— o 


si 

I 8 


— -C 
t; .t; 
05 g 

o 


T3 

C CO 

co .t; 
c c 


CD 

.c 


05 
TJ 

CO jo 


o oS xx 

O O « COLL 


< 

O 

LU 

o 

© c _ 

? g = 

w 

8 05 © 
X 05 O 


2 © 

•52, o o ^ 

co •= = x 

m CL CO 05 
X O > 
X CO O 05 

° © J£ ? 


o 

CD 

CL 

05 

c 

CD 

X 

o 

o 

g 

05 

C 

© 

Q. 

'CL 

05 


o 

< 

c 

<D 

E 

0) 

> 

o 

k_ 

CL 

E 

>. 

© 

"co 

CO 

© 

g 

05 

CL 


E c 

CO 05 
!=l T3 

g>"o 

Is 

C £ 
2 - 
CD — 

co 2 

© © 
^ o 
>. Q. 

■c 05 

05 x 

05 ~ 
*S 05 
•— 

Si 

Q-c 

o E 

05 O 
> *- 
05 05 

-o < 

■O O 
3 I 

o - 

g CO 


05 

< 

O 

X 

05 

CO 

T3 

© 

CO 

C . 
05 05 

05 CO 
CD CD 
T3 >. 


< 

a 

LU 

o 

c 

CO ^ 
o = 

it= 05 
C 05 
05 05 

CO O 


05 

X In! 


O 0. 


-© oT 

05 <£ 

j= O 

o X 

05 

3= « 

10 s 

>, vC 

05 05 

E 05 
o 
c 

05 

3 

cr 

05 
05 

c 
o 
o 


CO 05 

c ~ 
CD -J 
O CD 

Q-cd 
o x 
g 


o 

g 

T3 

c 

05 


© _ 
X 7 

O) C® 

E o 


© _ 
■o © 

3 

o 

c 


O) XL .9 


co 


r>- 

o 

o 

o 

05 

CL 


05 T3 — 


© C C .2 _ 


X 

o 


g °w 


co o © © 


© __ 

c 2 

CD © 


o © '-c 

CL_I 05 


05 

O 

CL 

CD 


_ <2 
X — 
05 ±= 

d ■© 

t: .tc 

© g 
o ;* 
© 


© o 
"« © 
CD .© 
X X 

1§ 


© 

2 £ 

W O 

© z 
05 £ 
E •£ 

c © 

o 9 


© £6 

.E 5 ©x 


< 

a 

LU 

a 

§1= 

r o - 

^ 7 W 


8 05 © 
_J 05 O 


© 

g £ 
o „ 


«l 


© 

o 

w 

o 

w 

c 

© 

o 


C5 

« 

© 

w 

Z3 

CD 

CO 

z> 


•O 
© 

05 

O . 

S- 5 
2 o 

“•■o 

V) c 

c « 
o ^ 

© O 
O) C 

IB 

o ^3 


(/) 

c 

o-2 

03 D 

C §■ 
© Q. 
O © 
CL w 

©^ 

.52 *“ 

® o 

© 05 

r- ♦-* 

O 

?| 

© E 

w" © 
© w 

o © 
o > 

*- T3 
© © 

~ £ 
© © 
Q. C 

‘5.0 

n 

it 

S' ©■ 

O 05 

cid 


© _ 
•— © 
sz © 

05 O 

1? 
£ ® 
w ©‘ 

2 « 
CL CO 

•i©- 

© © 
w © 


© 


© 


±= LL 
© 05 
© = 


o 

© 

O ° 
CL © 

s g 

CL © 

= © 
05 ^ 
C O 

o © 
© © 

£ © 
s © 
© © 


E S 2 r -2 ■© 


05 c — 
~ "© 

S 
•o © 

O T3 
O © 

g « 

•S3. C 
© © 

QQ q_ 

#cS 

- Q. 

O 5 

© © 

o 2 

X X 


© Q. 


« © 
© ^ 


C 

£ © 
© © 

£ © 

05^ 

.E © 

>. 05 

o-2 

©■ © 


©* © 

1 © 
© 9- 

CL Q. 


W 

c 

o 

■4-^ 

© 

3 

CL 

O 

CL 

© 

E 

o 

o 

c 

g 

o 

L_ 

o 

>S 

kZ 

o 

c 


■a 

1 s 
o © 
g © 

.E. © 

m ©- 

j= 2 

o © 

o g 

®3 

3 © 

X E 

2 co 
© = 
T5 © 
© CL 
X , A 


■o 

O § 

8 8 
.tr c/) 
> 0) 
<D 

£ c 
© © 
w © 
© a 
T3 

3 W 

Si 
•“ ♦-» 
*- W 

£ =6 


© 


-o = 


ra 

c 

iu 


<= ° 
E o 
© .c 

05 © 

o . 

V) 

© 


c S 

8 I 

© o 
© 5 

w 3 
© CL 
CL © 

,|i 

s © 
2 ■© 

o 

E 2 .E 


>, o 
c c 
o o 

II 

o c 
o © 
© © 

© £ 
05 O 

ro ° 

3 T3 
05 C 

c © 
© >_ 
z © 
© -© 
■£ E 

° i 


© 
Q. 

o 

"c 

3 

Q. E 

E T3 

o © 

° "a 

© © 

© 2 




o 

© 

© 

c 

© 

Q. 

"cl 

o 

w 

c 

© 

■g 

"w 

© 


E — 
_ c 

2 © 

£ 9 
© = 

x: "c 

.52 ,2> 

O) w 

c © 
X >, 
c 

'-o'Z 

© o 

© © 

3 w- 
"O © 
c -a 
o c 

O 3 


7 W i: 

?E 

© = t 
© © © 
m © c 

© E “ 

c/) 0 

*i_ O) 

o cm 

aS 9-2 

i_ o cc> 

© O CM 

a © ^ 
O o ° 
© = ~ 
5 -© ® 

3= 3 U1 

C CL E 

■ "O ® 

O § & 
© w CO 

II? 

RO © 

05 c 3 
E © ~5 
CL c 

© o •- 

® TO © 

S’® 2 

(- CJ © 

2% o 

05 c .©. 

C o O 
LU © q" 

o "© 2 
c CD £ 


a w 


© JD 
13 

•— CL 

o 

> 0) 
.tz ^ 

c h- 

is 

CL E 
CL © 

c 8 

© 8 

© 05 
TO 05 

> 2 

© CL 

c 5 
™ © 
o © 
© c 

2 = 
X w 
© 
© o 

£ cr 

3 © 
O © 
? o 
o o 
5 5 

3 3 
CL X 


8 « 

- 2 
© © 
£ w 

c § 

._ 

o — 
© sz 
o © 

II 

i w 

© "O 

© © 
>- © 
© - 

S| 

11 
3 « 
■C T3 
o c 
X © 
©-x 
© « 

£ "©> 

©- C 

.E x 


< 

O 

x 

O 

£ © — 

5 8 = 

© c © 

© 05 © 
_J 05 O 


© 

? o 
® © 
ra §. 
^© E 
>*Z 
© o 

© o 
o 2 
tr © 

x ® 
o 2 

x ® 
.52 -o 
x © 


c 

9 

c 

o 

X 

© 

E 

© 

E c 

5 2 

o © 

It 

II 

E o 


x 

CD 


5-69 


















5-70 














T3 O 
n> 

^ 3 

£L o 
cT 


o 

<' 

o 

C 

C/3 

o 


CO 


C/3 


n> 

C/3 

C/3 


LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 


o 018 416 492 9 


FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION 
Routing Code: PJ-11.1 
Washington, DC 20426 










, * ^ .A <c * w>. 


^ * * * 5 * L H * ^fe. Y ° * ** ^ 

l *y O /fr tteOfTfi?-. t **’ ,'< 

*. -W .fifilf; *q? ° 


_ ^•’.W,*/ *v ** 

•' *.:v B, '> v t .«, " * • • /. ^ *. -ti'" ■ ■* A 

^ wiim ^ ^ o 

o' ^ XN '• 

r iP*. * 

\ V-»/* ^ <V V*^*V o v V-, V<s 

B o? aP <k ^ 0 0, # » os o^ aO 

^ **V»**^A ” > %> -£> **«!»*• 

£ -'|«; Aa* 'S 3 ®!. \<& m; ^a* . 

S ',1*; "o^P/ \ *^P» <A° 1 

%V77o ' 

c A , 0 ’ <A ^ A 

j. r^ r 

' W 

V CA 

v<^V ,0 “ 0 ^ 

> y * ' V ‘ f> - C '" 05 

z 

*o “M/m\M" v’ aV * 'W.waikw a, <s,' \y-, 

,°V°’ c oN C< */£* «* * ^>^v° * *■ 

\V ° 


. o v Y ^> '^/ A v ^V» ^ * ao> V 

■ V • * * ‘K^>o° • 


v/ O * > 

1/1 

« '/‘O * 

9 o5P<v 

N ^ ^ 

♦ «* C„ *, 





% °o xr 

* o 5 * 

*° *♦ - 
* <X ^ 

\ - I > - ^ <1 O 7 . ' rQ \ * O fi. V 1 1 * 

» A a* » Jft! OrO . 

n c 3 « x/z/XjivAj ■" '*y * J o t ^ 3 v Tp 

„ <c? "A, oOT.* > %■«(«%* <^ ^ -W.* ^ ^ % 

fe.,\; ’ ‘;>v.,V * * "&£}'%? ' '&*%£*&* ’ ‘ ’> 0 ^ i "<°' 

». jw®?3> *. ^ > >0 ^ :m!m^ ^ 

o 


I 




<*• ,A> V ^ 



- • /#W* ;*»: ^ /4*fc\ yMr * 

*< * :S*"' **& ^\ ,,a "°’/°y *’&*%*"' 

1 w :*A:V /^S W * "W 

° tv 5 J J'- W o 
^ ^ ^ ■* 





w' 


v 7 

>°^ ** 


* 

V ^ 0 A ^OK®’ A 0 .. 0 > V». ln 

S Qa a "- 5 „ c % ^ 

^ M* ^rA^/ko ^ 

* Xr V 1 -' ... t . 

/ &\ lW//\ -. 

V *" % 


- 

*'^wsr <r ^ v ^ 

^ ^ L, ^% y ° ^ "V^ c- oNc ^ 

,\ 0 s?d&s* 0 *i* s*m:- 

- ^o> 


v r 

p , < * » 

C, 0 * 40 ^. -O^ 



^ <V r <v ♦jAw/Vlo >> 

'SK r %<#> : mmh ~ 


'ov 




* * y °4. ^oso' 3 V *»n ^ ^ „ °4> # >OKO° ^P 

> s 4 VjV Oa *5T /„*°% V^ 'v sV x\ <<y V, 

/jar* \/ .*^a4% \/ -'Mb,^ ■>■ 

x r fi : 'Swmz z > n z y 7 : 2 


Xo° 4 ^^ oNc ^V * # oO^r-^ 

% O a A 4 ^ r «/i. O ♦ aewfoj't 


, y O *’ 

. So^ : 

; <^°^ 

., .Si? % 

9 j n + <v 


O 


Vs v^v^y/// z . - . ■ | 

* « S® * <£ 3 \ °o¥®p *■ * 

S' 0 * ‘‘/ c o“«« ^ * * 5 o* ** 1 - , */\' 0 • l * ' 

°0 ^ » 0° * aertfrl% O 0 

; W »®; w •«■ 

’ v°^: 

O ^ 


O O 

0 o 

* V A - J 


-ov^ <w :im^t 


_ _ . , "OV 0 

WiS' '® , '° 0 ^ : *^^* -5SP"* o^k 

4 P °o A ^ToT^ < '*P° c b, ^ , 

v ■ 1 v^k\, ^Vax**!%: 1 1 /^>>; ■ 1 v 

0 "®®* 'M'r.c,^ 'f^S^&o 4%^ ; €£$k * •■jSSCfeo i 


V-v 


* 




%*'oV»’>\A 0<Ii 40/ 

V<b o°%' 

-- «-♦ o'^Sflk' ky 0 <t i 





^ ^ ^^vyj^r /* w* ^ r\ ^ t 

C ,mo, /V “o>V"’ 

* \/ :M 

r aVA J .llWo ,C^V. o ^ 




, R® ■ 4 *', *!!“*♦ A * * * 

» J v A 'k!S>>4^ k. . c f&OTfcx.-' 

; •S-r . > 0 ' 


DKO 


* rO h> +sWj&J* 

0 ^°»i.o/V” *v 





x v 
> Al 


AO „ •S.^vT^jf 

so , 0 ^^* kO *^K» ^ 

« . / V ■ 1 * Vt * * * >■*% '” 0^.'*O' 
s % ^ r ,. 

/ I’ilfP.* 


ONC, 


I -5 Ox 

A- +> 

^ a”' NK *^_* 

, -,,- ^ * Pj> "Dso’ ^ 

°o A, A ,r ^Sfe'. A A 

o 


AV 0 

tp-v : 
> s. * 




^ r 

>• ^ <c*xo " ° *°Vi> t ^ 

H'' 1 “>“5^%' 0 “ 0 V\ ^ A ' tv 

, 0 As -<v aaVai o ^ 

is « - %cf> ' 


OjJ'r 



0 ^ ** l,ji 4 45 



o * i 


OKO 


i A 
+ *-* or® - * 

i V / 

. _ J ^/> * 

y<r OHO° 

« r ^V k* «T cf(\W/h- o ^ 

*f W >= 

n O 

k ^ a.* ▼ K O 


► S & «Ta * 


'srsr 4 - y> 


V 'oV^V •.... v,V?^> ^ °.w«*>' 






-0 0 - /,«,\ < • • G°*k^\ * 

: V /^Ao* ^ 


*n * 







^V" " ' W L, N°V° * cose, <£< - • w,X % °^V 

*. \ P * o «$* *^**v/,r ** 0° ♦‘’a-tBsA °0 A 

k V :®: V* .°*Htk ^ :^: ^ ° 


* ^ x*' *- 

; - 
,>.vk * 

. v M 4 . *. 

A 


jP< 


L?- >_ ,.., V'..*’/,. A 

<o V °4 -& A 

- - « V ^ * ;(\% L o % o 

^ V - l ® V*V 



N <. ^TTs s \cr 
c0 l°**\ r oV 1 

■ • .°4I». -w 
° *^7 * »A°* 

» V, *” - '?’' s • ■> ,.‘fy/*"* 0 ’ 4-° , » 0 'Vk'n » 4 *<^. « . °4- '**» 

* V 

:■ <? % Iwf •’ ,>> a »llnlr r ’ ^Jk lmm$: ■> 

y y K * v £Vk** v M' *r*Xr * ° A W * <v 

y 'o T -^\t° Nc 4/ < ^ ” *’ 6^ ** Li ** 4fc*° * x \<£^ c0"O4* * ** <$£ « L, j» <t < V r /° * 


° sty ~J’ O 

* ^ ^ ° 

«ta » 

"A ^ Ll | . <1 a r O q u 

*i v «. t 'r 







1 * «5<i* w „ O )^A : 4 4,0. <« ’ 

' ^ * V 4 . ViA^Wr/Vi o <>*> <" *■ 



' ^>1 

* ws^s ? +4>%> * 


Vb- < 

% °o X 

: K . ■ 
;/\v 

*o«o° *. 

* »» , sV-». V 

* %% s J % 

. J * 




»!' 


■ \°*wtW; *?"% \W$: A®/\ '.SB; 

V 8 • 5 >°t«-.v*^ ,.. ( w/.... >v° .V;p oko v^kk> v t 


i V » S/ »i w / 




;: V /^k'. V • *; : V /^6f: ^ :4^- 


* j 

: ■ / ov v 

. . r ^ # »=k'o^P^, 4 0 ^**.„ »'^S^ * » ^\'**»* 

- -<^ j ?p. o <: , 

°o ,,-^\ c< 




. ON 


*° N °oVo # v^ n # * V^°*. #9 V 0 °, * 0 *£ 

p ^ *Vu A \ V. .<b v X^ 0 ; 


S v 

p^l 



^ %. x*> ^ 

; W f 

it 


p 4^. V 
n t5? vf ’o 




^O' o 
4,0. * 

■v ^ * 

, - s'- C 4 -«*. 

S - *•-* ■* \' OB ° 

; \<P 

i 



r 4 « « ? 


,-V' °v* - 

xc * Q/ . *>S<n-i 

V a c <» 

AJ 



° 

z V^ 
o cjo'l 

A° V „ L ! aoV^V^ONO % S V^ L , 






>0* 

?*” ^ • • ^V—• o/v- • Vt *.\w, # Q vSy,. x 
\f :ggk\ %S :'$k\ : \/ 4»= w / “ 

Am ; A '.B.'.A s ® ; ^ ^.M 0 ^ z 


A L I i 


\**o\Wy~ N V V> tlA 

+ ^OV 4, o^ 1 

^ . _ <■ -AAifl ■ 

o ^■HIMMH 

»> j 




Hfckman 


BINDERY, INC 

Bound-To-Please* 



07-B5426 


N. MANCHESTER, INDIANA 46962 


* rP 

■ * . m 'A> '^KO 1 A° 

h y\ x> 

r : 


-/°o > * c ^*' % 



,c^ u jV 



■* 'y. o 

* » * aP L I J Pt- 

.o v ^ ^ *b 

'•7 . O .4* g&frffe? + O 


%<? 







o^-'-nV^V^ coho, V 7 * 7 >. ^ ■ • ,V'°-‘V 


° fA\ :A r ; %, 

<>. ^ * S s .6^ 



























































































































































































































































































































































































































